Re: The Word - John 1
Ray
follows on my own and it's in this light that I share it. While I've
loved the book of John for years, what I've learned of 'the Word' is
recent, like within the last month.)
The book of John provides us with something I'm finding not so unique
in scripture - a description of a logic puzzle, or a riddle which
causes one to search the scriptures for the answer. Indeed, this book
appears to be structured in such a way that it has led me to seek 'the
rest of the story'. I've seen many puzzles developed in this wonderful
book and the answers, as found in scripture, are treasures.
John begins his testimony of Yahshua by painting something like a
poetic picture of him - that is, he provides a description of him to
help us understand more of what he is like. John wrote:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Yahweh, and
the Word was Yahweh.
2 He was with Yahweh in the beginning.
And verse 14 states: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling
among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only who
came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
As the surface reading of the book of John centers about Yahshua,
verse 14 tells us that Yahshua is 'The Word'.
But why does the author of John start his book in this way? I think it
goes straight to why Yahshua spoke in parables. Matthew records that
Yahshua's disciples asked him "Why do you speak in parables?" and he
told them why [1]. Matthew also wrote this comment: "So was fulfilled
what was spoken through the prophet: "I will open my mouth in
parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world."
" [2] The fact that Yahshua spoke parables and no one could understand
him carries the reason for him speaking in parables today. Man cannot
understand scripture on his own but with help, man can. Yahshua helped
them (as he continues to help us) understand.
I asked the questions "What is the Word?" and "How could one person be
all of these things?" and I was led to the relationships shown to us
Genesis 1.
My understanding of the creation sequence is that Yahweh created man
in His image (He said "our image" [3] (which means more than one), and
then He gave man a helper when he separated His newly created image
into two parts, male and female. Yahweh called the female created from
His image, 'helper' [4].
After Adam and woman were banished from the Garden of Eden, the
physical life of 'man' has been propagated through the birth of
children starting from Adam and his helper. 'Man' - male and female -
has brought forth physical life into our world and it is in this way
that the life of man has continued. Spiritual life in man died in the
Garden when they chose to sin against Yahweh.
Physically and spiritually Yahweh first created a child in His image-
Adam - and then He created parents from the child which would also
represent His image. In the beginning I see that Yahweh created a
family. Every child has two parents so, when referenced from the
child, I see that every family is a unit of three AND, through the
eyes of a parent or a mature child, every family is a unit of one.
It is in this light (this understanding) I see in John Chapter 1 that
'the Word' could be used as a metaphor (a description) of the word
'Family'. It is with this in mind that these verses of John make sense
to me.
1. In the beginning was Family, and Family was with Yahweh, and Family
was Yahweh.
Verse 2 and verse 14 echo verse 1.
2. Yahshua (the mature child, Family) was with Yahweh in the
beginning.
Each of us represents our family unit so we are, in essence, our
family. Family members can be with family, and any family is a unit of
one.
I've tried to show in my Narrow Gate thread "Metaphors of Scripture -
Light" [5] how I have come to understand that the word 'light' is used
throughout scripture as a description for 'understanding' and how
'dark' or 'darkness' also describes a place of the unknown, of death,
a place apart from Yahweh.
The following verses reference John 1:3- 14. I have inserted into
these verses the understanding I've just shared. (I mean no offense to
anyone; I am only trying to describe what I understand the verses to
say.)
3 Through Yahshua (Yahweh) all things were made, without him nothing
was made that has been made.
4 In Yahshua was life, and that life was the light of (for) men.
5 Yahshua (the understanding of Yahweh) shines in the places apart
from Yahweh (the world of men), but they have not understood (or
overcome) it.
6 There came a man who was sent from Yahweh; his name was John.
7 He came as a witness to testify concerning the arrival of the
spiritual understanding of Yahweh, so that through him all men might
believe.
8 John was not the light (of understanding); he came only as a
witness to the light.
9The true light (the true understanding) that gives understanding to
every man was coming into the world.
10 Yahshua was in the world, and though the world was made through
him, the world did not recognize him.
11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive
him.
12 Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he
gave the right to become children of Yahweh --
13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a
husband's will, but born of Yahweh.
14 'The Word' became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have
seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the
Father, full of grace and truth.
Verse 13 describes a new spiritual creation in Yahweh, Yahshua and
Peter called it 'born again'[6, 7]. (I see that this new creation is
also described in Genesis 1 and is what is referenced by the apostle
Paul [8]
When we chose to follow Yahshua - that is, we believe in his name and
receive him, we have the right to become spiritual children of Yahweh
[9]. When we become His children, He becomes our Father and we become
heirs to His kingdom. When this happens we have the right to ask our
Father Yahweh for help in understanding Him.
In Genesis 1 Yahweh knew of his child's need for help before his child
did, and when Yahweh's child understood that he was alone Yahweh gave
him a helper. Today most of mankind has a physical helper, yet it is
only Yahweh's spiritual children that have access to His spiritual
helper. Yahweh showed us this relationship and this process when He
recorded the creation of his image of light as a Family.
Isn't this what happens to us today? When we believe in Yahshua then
we have the right to become Yahweh's spiritual children. Yahweh knows
our needs before we do and He provides for us (His children) a helper
(His helper) when we understand that we are alone. It is our right to
ask Him for help and He will give it to us if we ask.
I understand that it is the union between each of His children and His
helper that in maturity gives birth to His other spiritual children.
He places us before others to call them out of death, and His Son
Yahshua is our example to live by.
Some or all of this may not be important to anyone but me. No one in
my lifetime has been able to explain the relationship of Yahweh, the
Father, His Spirit and His Son to me, and no one could provide any
understanding of Yahweh's Spirit. The generalizations and teachings of
Yahshua in the gospels were all I had, and the rest were empty records
and not much more.
What I've just shared is what I see written into scripture - it is
what I have been shown by Yahweh's gift to me. When I finally
understood I needed help I asked, and He gave to me His helper just as
He has done for some of you.
Shalom,
Ray
1. Matthew 13:10- 16, Isaiah 6:9, 10
2. Psalm 78, quote from verse:2
3. Genesis 1:26- 27
4. Genesis 2:18
5. Narrow Gate post http://groups.google.com/group/TheNarrowGate/browse_thread/thread/d974b65652edce18?hl=en
6. John 3: (3, 7)
7. 1 Peter 1:23
8. 2 Corinthians 12:2
9. John 1:12- 13
John Medwin
|
Excellent topic! One of the conclusions you all are sure to reach by the time this thread winds down is this: John 1 is too wide open to formulate hard fast doctrine. You can read whatever you want to in John 1. John was being poetic and it's scary to make doctrines out of things that are not stated in black and white and that conflict with the Torah. So here are some things to note in John 1.
1. What is not said. John does not say "in the beginning was the Son." We read that into it due to poor translations and assumed doctrine.
2. Look carefully at translations. You will find that one word can mean various things and the word that is used will depend on the background of the translator. Case in point - Ray's version |
|
3 Through Yahshua (Yahweh) all things were made, without him nothing
was made that has been made.
|
A close look at verse 3 will reveal that John does not say "through Yahshua" or even "through him". In fact that rendering improperly leads us to think of the word as a second divine Person, rather than the mind and promise of God. Eight English translations before the KJV did not read “All things were made by Him.” They read “All things were made by it,” a much more natural way of referring to the word of God. Thus, for example, the Geneva Bible of 1602: “All things were made by it and without it was made nothing that was made.” No one reading those words would imagine that there was a Son in heaven before his birth.
And Ray's version, which mirrors most common translations is opposed by the Tanach:
Isa 44:24 ASV Thus saith Jehovah, thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb: I am Jehovah, that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth (who is with me?);What this means is that all NT translations must line up with this - we do not rewrite the Tanach, as we cannot add to or take away. The same case in Col 1:16
Col 1:16 ASV for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;So is Paul contradicting the Torah? Or do we have some translator issues? Examine carefully the tiny word "in". Funny how 2 letters can overturn the Torah. "In" also means "because of". So if you say "because of him (Yeshua) all things were created", now we have perfect harmony with the Shema, Isaiah, and John 1.
3. John was Hebrew, believed in the Shema and wrote like a Hebrew. John is using the style of the Hebrews of personification. He is giving human attributes to God's ways, just like Proverbs does. And keep in mind in Proverbs Wisdom is a woman!!! So if you are reading John 1 to mean Yeshua, then you have another conflict with Proverbs.
4. The Word is not God. God created the word. An improper reading of John 1 can get you into trouble! And if you look carefully at the Greek, you will notice 2 different Greek words are used in John 1 for "God". John was telling us that in the beginning was the word and the word was God's. There is no possessive in the Greek. God came up with the word.
5. John did not write "in the beginning was the logos", he wrote "in the beginning was the dabar". John was writing in Hebrew with Hebrew concepts. And if you examine "word" in Hebrew you'll see it has a million meanings. So which of those words fits what we already know. I'd say it was "promise, purpose, work" or "plan". Look at it this way. Before God created anything, He came up with a plan. He saw the Messiah and saw him slain.
Rev 13:8 KJV And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.Yeshua was not slain twice! God saw this plan in the beginning and he also saw you there.
Eph 1:4 KJV According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:So, because of the plan, the world was created. The Plan was not God, it belonged to God. And guess what? The Plan or the promise is now made flesh. He has come! That is what John is trying to tell us. John goes on in verse 18 to say that no man has ever seen God at any time. He was not confused. He in no way was saying that Yeshua was God. He did not contradict himself, or the Torah.
Is it no wonder the Jews have such problems with Christianity? We read John 1 and formulate all this doctrine that contradicts the Shema (God is 1), Isaiah 44 and tons of verses where God alone created the heavens and the earth, Proverbs where "Wisdom" is a woman, and the 3 verses in the Tanach that says God is not a man. And let's call a spade a spade - due to John 1 theology we come to believe as a tenant of our faith in reincarnation. That the Eternal Son was inserted into a human being or as a human being. That's reincarnation and never stated in the NT. It is based in John 1. These are some heavy baggage to carry due to a poem.
So this "poetry" can create a lot of false doctrine. Be careful folks of arriving at theology that is only assumed here and goes against the Torah. Either John was a Jew who thought and wrote like a Jew or he was a heretic. Your choice.
-------Original Message------- |
what I have been shown by Yahweh's gift to me, His Spirit. When I |
|
finally understood I needed help I asked, and He gave to me His
|
helper. |
Ray
I didn't post to offend but to learn, and learning I am.
All I have are the translations to learn from and places like this
board. I am learning primarily from NIV and move at times through the
other (as I understand now, more recent) translations to see if and
where there is continuity. I do not read Hebrew and a friend (who
does) recommended that I purchase "The Jerusalem BIble' (revised and
edited by Harold Fische) which I did and am beginning to compare. Most
of the other translations are available through software search
engines making word searches much faster than flipping pages. It will
take me a while to look for differences in the translations as I still
have to work and support a family. Unfortunately 'The Jerusalem Bible'
does not have the 'New Testament' in it. I do not read Greek or Aramic
so all I can do is compare what I have and look for relationships. And
it is the relationships I find that I'm sharing.
You mentioned the Geneva Bible of 1602. I'm not afraid to learn from
others. Are you aware of software that contains this translation?
I see more relationships beyond what I have shared in this post
written into the book of John - I have only shared about Genesis. The
writings of the book of John seem to point to what I wrote in this
thread concerning the children of Yahweh moving from death to life. I
do not want to project deception upon anyone, I want to understand
what is right, So please forgive me as I share what I'm learning and
continue to help me learn. Perhaps you could recommend some
translations I could learn from.
It will take me some time to understand all of what you have written.
I (typically) will print it out and read it slowly over time because
I've found I often overlook the obvious if I do things too quickly.
My time of study is in direct competition with my obligations as a
husband and father (and fixer, and go-fer, and provider and everything
else that comes along with life) but I give it what I can.
Yahshua spoke in parables and no one understood them until he
explained them. Even today the reason for speaking in parables and
metaphors is unclear to most people. Whatever the explanation, I can
understand why Matthew recorded why Yahshua spoke in parables. Don't
let that one slip by.
Thank you for your reply, I will take what you are writing and try to
learn from it.
Shalom,
Ray
> Rev 13:8 KJV And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose
> names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the
> foundation of the world.
> Yeshua was not slain twice! God saw this plan in the beginning and he also
> saw you there.
>
> Eph 1:4 KJV According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of
> the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
> So, because of the plan, the world was created. The Plan was not God, it
> belonged to God. And guess what? The Plan or the promise is now made flesh
>
> read more >>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yochannan
will add a few of
my own. No one knows who write the book called John. We do know that
it
dates about 120 AD, so it cannot have been the Apostle that was
called "John." We do know, that it stands by it'self, and does not
follow
the synoptics. Instead, the book teaches a religious belief that does
not follow the
teachings of the Messiah Yahshua from the synoptics.
The book called John has been called the"Christology" book. This
means,
that it develops the person of Yahshua into a god, gives the person
"pre-existance"
and teaches "human sacrifice" as a necessary requirement for YHWH to
forgive sin.
All these are contrary to the clear teachings of the Tanakh. The book
of John
is full of pagan ideology, and false teachings. It is better to stick
with what the
Prophet Yahshua taught, rather than to out guess the religion that
was
subsequently built on him rather than on what the historical figure is
said
to have taught.
As for the rendering of John 1, 1-15, you can find my literal
translation of it at:
http://assemblyoftrueisrael.com/Documents/JohnChapterOneCorrected.html
Also for what historical translations read see:
http://assemblyoftrueisrael.com/Documents/historic_John1.htm
Yochannan William
> Rev 13:8 KJV And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose
> names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the
> foundation of the world.
> Yeshua was not slain twice! God saw this plan in the beginning and he also
> saw you there.
>
> Eph 1:4 KJV According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of
> the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
> So, because of the plan, the world was created. The Plan was not God, it
> belonged to God. And guess what? The Plan or the promise is now made flesh
Ray
Before I get too deep in our dialogue I would like to know what
translations you are using for Matthew, the rest of the New Testament,
and the Old Testament. Knowing what you base your comments from puts
us on a less cluttered platform.
I basically utilize NIV as currently provided via www.biblegateway.com
for my studies although I occasionally look at the other translations.
I've found several of the translations essentially convey the same
information when viewed as a whole. Learning how to utilize new
software is somewhat difficult for me but I plan to try to work with e-
sword.
I understand by your previous reply (with your direct references to
John 1) that the apostle John wrote the gospel of John in Hebrew, or
that he wrote in Greek in a Hebrew style. I understand from its unique
structure that this book had one author (probably John) and multiple
reviewers and that it was probably written in Aramaic with the Greek
translation made at a later time. What language it was written in is a
small point with me as the pictures it paints remains the same.
I have learned not to take one word from a verse to understand what
scripture means but to look at how the word is used in every verse to
understand how it is used. I think it's a fair observation that most
disciples of Yahshua do not do this - indeed, the software for
studying in this way is fairly new.
I understand that you consider the NT translations are flawed - is
this a fair observation? I agree, with a few qualifications: I am
convinced that the authors and translators of the NT wrote and
translated their best to express their understanding of what they knew
(or understood) but we both know that man is flawed. The authors of
the NT show personal bias and prejudice in some of what they wrote,
yet what they wrote is perfect considering they were not. I try to
look at questionable or unclear statements to see how they could be
right and I've found continuity in this method. I recognize that it is
easier to find fault with something than it is to see how it could be
correct. Most people choose the easier route.
It's important for me to state that Yahshua is what is important. He
is the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father
except through him. He calls for us to emulate him so that we can
better understand scripture. This leads to a better understanding of
who and what we are, and who and what Yahweh is. We need to strive to
emulate him in every way. That's the confession to the world of the
understanding of truth about him in our heart.
I respect you and I will exert every effort to understand what you
write. I'm slow when I write as I often find myself off on a tangent.
If it looks like I'm coming across as disrespectful then tell me.
Sometimes what I'm trying to communicate is muddled by my poor choices
of words.
Thank you and Shalom,
Ray
> Rev 13:8 KJV And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose
> names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the
> foundation of the world.
> Yeshua was not slain twice! God saw this plan in the beginning and he also
> saw you there.
>
> Eph 1:4 KJV According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of
> the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
> So, because of the plan, the world was created. The Plan was not God, it
> belonged to God. And guess what? The Plan or the promise is now made flesh
.
|
We must go to the entire Bible in order to learn. Here a little, there a little.
If Yahshua was only "words", in the OT, who spoke to all those men ? Who led the Israelites in the cloud? Who was in the furnace with Daniel;? Etc. | ||
|
|
John Medwin
|
Ray: My friend you are the furthest thing from disrespectful or muddled. The great thing about the Messianic movement, is we can all share from our different perspectives. But read my words with caution. I am the black sheep of all my Messianic friends. I am rarely welcomed in Messianic congregations because I don't think the way they do. Along with truth can come much heartache.
If I was to sum up what I see, it is this. In church we figured that the Jews were blind and stupid and the NT was rewriting the rules. So we adopted much theology that was in conflict with the Tanach. But Yeshua himself laid down the ground rules with crystal clarity. Until heaven and earth pass away not a jot or tittle will pass from the Torah. And if we teach that even the least of the commandments is no longer valid then we will be least in the kingdom.
So folks, are the sacrifices a least command or a weightier command? So how can we as Messianics dismiss the sacrifices. Our NT theology must line up without conveniently dismissing 1/3 of the Torah. We cannot dismiss Ezek 18 that says that a father cannot die for the son or the son for the father. We all must stand for how we have lived our life and our NT message cannot invalidate the Tanach.
We cannot say that our 3 gods are really one. Let's get real. When the Father spoke from heaven and the son was in the Jordan and the Holy Spirit appeared - how many do you see? I count 3. So how many of them are God? There can only be one. We can fight all day long over what echad means, but what does it mean to be Supreme? There can only be 1 Supreme Being. We must line up with the Tanach.
We cannot say no one can be righteous under the Law while Luke tells us that Zach & Eliz were both righteous by keeping the Law. We cannot say no one can keep the Torah while God says in Deut 30:11 that it is not too hard for us. We have got to catch ourselves from repeating church theology that does not line up with Torah.
As to your question, Ray, I like the American Standard Version of 1901, though e-sword allows me to look at several versions at a glance. I tend to distance myself from the more modern translations. And yes, we have translation problems. It is impossible to translate from one language to another without our own personal doctrines getting in the way. And the vast majority of the versions were written by traditional Christian or Catholic translators. So we have to dig deep to find the proper meanings. Take this verse:
Col 2:9 KJV For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. So somebody tell me where you find the word "godhead" in the Tanach? This is the only time this word appears in all of the NT. Does that not sound strange? These type verses could give us pause.
And I do agree, that Yeshua is key. The old adage is a good one. How did Yeshua walk? We should walk and believe what he did:
1Jo 2:6 ASV he that saith he abideth in him ought himself also to walk even as he walked.I find security in fashioning my beliefs in the things that Yeshua believed. He never spoke of a Trinity or a 3 in 1. Therefore neither will I. He served and prayed to the God of Israel. I will do likewise. I keep the days he kept, including Chanukah. He did not come to establish a new religion centered around him, as he always pointed us towards YHWH. I will therefore do what he did. He lived as a Jew, why not us? We ought to walk as he walked. What could be safer? |
Ray
No need to apologize. I appreciate your response. I hope it isn't too
late to pick back up on this - I've had a demanding and grueling past
few weeks (and several more to come!)
I think I see the book of John in a different understanding than most
people. Maybe this is one of the reasons I write as I do.
I know that the book of John is far more than what first meets the eye
and it is far more than what has been settled on over the years. I do
not know if I will be able to adequately share what I see in this book
but I can try. I started a post about this book when I first joined
the board and didn't continue it because I didn't know how. Perhaps it
will happen here.
It seems to me that scripture overall describes physical events, and
that most people assume to understand them with their physical
background. Most teachers teach only what they have been taught, and
most of them do not allow their students to explore and grow. What I
see that is so often neglected is that scripture is spiritual. I see
that what has been described in the physical is meant for us to
understand in the spiritual. My path of understanding scripture began
in the book of John.
Consider Yahshua: I don't see him as different in most aspects of his
life as anyone else. I see him as a child doing what children did. I
see him as a young man learning and doing the things that young men at
that time did. He ate and drank and laughed and cried and bled and
felt pain and blended in so well with his environment that even his
siblings did not know what he was. The men of his area thought of him
as Joseph's son and even with the miracles he performed they did not
believe in him. Yet for all his commonness, what set him apart from
others was his supernatural ability to understand scripture. I think
that, in his learning process through his family structure and their
relationship with Yahweh, he recognized the scriptural relationships
of the world around him. He was able to understood Yahweh's message to
us as he lived and matured. I think he recognized who he was through
scripture. This is what I see and to my knowledge it contradicts what
everyone else has been taught.
What I just shared makes me something of a 'black sheep' in my group
and very much alone.
Yahshua was filled with Yahweh's Spirit from birth and it was not
taken from him during his life. Yahweh's helper was not given to him
later in life but at the beginning of it. He is the way. I see that
this is what happens to us when we believe in him and confess him to
others with how we live our lives. We become new spiritual creations
and in doing so Yahweh's Spirit comes to us. It's only by emulating
him that we can learn and understand.
Yahshua was the first new creation since the fall of man and the book
of John captures this. John 1 tells us that when we believe in him we
have the right to become children of Yahweh. I see this new creation
here, I see it described in Genesis, and in the flood of Noah, and in
the crossing of the Red Sea, and other places. I see His salvation and
offer of life throughout scripture, but I see how it relates to me
here.
Yahshua is the way and the truth and the life. The records show us
that we are able to follow him if we believe in him and strive to
conform to his ways. As 'man' we do not have that supernatural ability
to understand scripture as he did, but as children of Yahweh we do
have the ability to learn as he did through Yahweh's helper. Our
miracles may not be on the same level has his, but we do have the
ability to perform miracles. Where he fed five thousand we might feed
two or three, or more. And we are the recipients of miracles. I have
witnessed my daughters crushed and punctured lungs be supernaturally
healed through the prayers of many of Yahweh's children. He is the way
and he calls for us to emulate him.
I understand how Yahshua said that he and the Father are one. I wrote
that I think Yahshua recognized who he was through scripture. Yahshua
found his Father Yahweh in the word - in scripture. In the beginning
Father are one. John 1 tells us that when we believe in him we have
the right to become Yahweh's children. 'One', then, must be Family -
in heart, and mind, and strength.
Yahshua calls us to emulate him and become new creations. He has shown
us the way by his living example. He was born flesh and blood like the
rest of us, was raised in a loving family like many of us, lived the
life of a mortal like all of us, and he physically died like all of us
will. Yet Yahshua moved from death in man to eternal life in Yahweh.
He rose above the death of the world. He lived to give us hope by
showing us Yahweh's promise of eternal life. He shows us this
relationship by the example of his life on earth.
The book of John is a spiritual book - it carries the physical world
of man into the spiritual realm of Yahweh. It has hidden records
within its structure. It is an incredible supernatural literary marvel
that could not possibly have been written by one person in it's
present form. I see that one person authored it and that many people
reviewed and verified it because they wrote that they know his
testimony is true. 'They' would be the ones he wrote about and added
personal comments on. I can understand why it surfaced many years
after the others. I see it as a great treasure and a key that, for at
least me, opens the window of understanding scripture.
Thanks and Shalom,
Ray
On Jan 2, 9:04 pm, Yochannan <aoycasc...@assemblyoftrueisrael.com>
wrote:
Ray
>Excellent topic! One of the conclusions you all are sure to reach by the time this thread winds down is this: John 1 is too wide open to formulate hard fast doctrine. You can read whatever you want to in John 1. John was being poetic and it's scary to make doctrines out of things that are not stated in black and white and that conflict with the Torah. So here are some things to note in John 1.
understanding of this passage. The book of John, like all of scripture
was written to be understood. 'John' is unique among all of the books
of scripture.
According to the testimonies of Matthew, Mark and Luke Yahshua spoke
poetically, didn't he?
>1. What is not said. John does not say "in the beginning was the Son." We read that into it due to poor translations and assumed doctrine.
From the Geneva Bible:
John 1:1 In the beginning was that Word, ...
John 1:14 And that Word was made flesh, and dwelt among vs, ...
From NIV (The Geneva translation is very close)
Matthew 3:17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I
love; with him I am well pleased."
Matthew 17:5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud enveloped
them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my Son, whom I love;
with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!"
In two instances Matthew recorded that Yahweh called Yahshua his
"Son". Matthew also recorded that Yahshua constantly pointed to and
addressed Yahweh as "Father". Yahshua taught relationships so that we
could understand relationships. From the records of Matthew, the 'Son-
Father'" relationship is pretty well defined. If 'Father' is also
referred to as 'teacher', the relationship still exists.
Don't be so quick to cast off what is written in the book of John.
It's a book of great treasure.
>2. Look carefully at translations. You will find that one word can mean various things and the word that is used will depend on the background of the translator. Case in point - Ray's version
> 3 Through Yahshua (Yahweh) all things were made, without him nothing
> was made that has been made.
translation to what I was using (NIV) for these verses and I see no
difference in how the translations describe this record and what I
wrote. (This is explained a little better a few paragraphs below this
one.)
Also, one word in a verse doesn't make doctrine or provide
understanding. It takes looking at that word in ALL of the verses to
understand it's usage as well as viewing it in context with what
surrounds it.
> A close look at verse 3 will reveal that John does not say "through Yahshua or even "through him".
Isn't the image (the structure) of Yahweh carried through His
children, in the lives we live, in our example of His life to others?
If it isn't, then scripture would have to be dead and we both know
that it is very much alive.
>In fact that rendering improperly leads us to think of the word as a second divine Person, rather than the mind and promise of God. Eight English translations before the KJV did not read "All things were made by Him." They read "All things were made by it," a much more natural way of referring to the word of God. Thus, for example, the Geneva Bible of 1602: "All things were made by it and without it was made nothing that was made." No one reading those words would imagine that there was a Son in heaven before his birth.
Verse 1 says "The Word" in both translations. The use of the word
'it' (in the Geneva) is a direct reference to "the Word" in verse 1.
I'm not a grammar geek (I wish I were at times) yet I understand the
basic flow of written information. The trouble I sense you have with
this is that the Geneva translators referred to the Word (as defined
in verse 14) as 'it' and the NIV carries the definition of verse 14
into verse 3.
Is Yahshua divine? He was created in the image of his Father. He was
given authority over heaven and earth. He is our salvation. He is the
only way to the Father. He is our example. Those who choose and
believe in him have the right to become children of Yahweh which makes
us his siblings. Is he divine? Well, it depends on what your
definition of 'divine' is. He certainly is the way and the truth and
the life, and he is the only way to our Father.
>And Ray's version, which mirrors most common translations is opposed by the Tanach:
>Isa 44:24 ASV Thus saith Jehovah, thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb: I am Jehovah, that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth (who is with me?); What this means is that all NT translations must line up with this - we do not rewrite the Tanach, as we cannot add to or take away. The same case in Col 1:16
>Col 1:16 ASV for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;
>So is Paul contradicting the Torah? Or do we have some translator issues? Examine carefully the tiny word "in". Funny how 2 letters can overturn the Torah. "In" also means "because of". So if you say "because of him (Yeshua) all things were created", now we have perfect harmony with the Shema, Isaiah, and John 1.
is.
I have no problem with Shema (as I understand it), but Shema without
understanding is - what?
People mouth words they don't understand all of the time because it's
what they were taught to do. I am well aware of this in many of the
Christian churches that say the same things over and over - like the
Doxology and the Lord's Prayer. The words are memorized but not
understood. Very few people dwell on what the words mean and most of
the people who have been taught verses learned them (many times) from
youth because it's a traditional thing to do. There is only One
Yahweh. I do not worship two or three Gods, I worship One.
I do not see "translator issues", I see people who read and study
scripture as having a problem understanding it. Scripture is written
for more than man's understanding ie: man's definition of the words.
Scripture is meant to convey to us a full understanding what Yahweh's
written words are communicating to His children.
Matthew recorded that Yahshua spoke in parables and Matthew provided
an explanation why he did. Yahshua also spoke with metaphors. From
what I've learned in my (somewhat unique) approach to seeking an
understanding of scripture is that Yahshua did this to help us
understand the structure of how scripture is written. When we begin
understanding the structure of the word, we can understand what Yahweh
is saying to us. Yahshua is the way.
>3. John was Hebrew, believed in the Shema and wrote like a Hebrew. John is using the style of the Hebrews of personification. He is giving human attributes to God's ways, just like Proverbs does. And keep in mind in Proverbs Wisdom is a woman!!! So if you are reading John 1 to mean Yeshua, then you have another conflict with Proverbs.
it. I see this as an example of scripture describing a characteristic
of Yahweh.
In the beginning Yahweh created man in his image. But Yahweh also did
more: He then separated his image into two parts, both different yet
alike and neither more important than the other, but only together
make one. The first image projects a child. The second image (of two)
presents a union of one. The two (or three images) together constitute
the image of Yahweh - a picture of life that projects a future.
>4. The Word is not God. God created the word. An improper reading of John 1 can get you into trouble! And if you look carefully at the Greek, you will notice 2 different Greek words are used in John 1 for "God". John was telling us that in the beginning was the word and the word was God's. There is no possessive in the Greek. God came up with the word.
It is my understanding that the Aramaic writing of the book of John
preceded the Greek translation of Rome. It still doesn't change the
relationship I see written into scripture.
>5. John did not write "in the beginning was the logos", he wrote "in the beginning was the dabar". John was writing in Hebrew with Hebrew concepts. And if you examine "word" in Hebrew you'll see it has a million meanings. So which of those words fits what we already know. I'd say it was "promise, purpose, work" or "plan". Look at it this way. Before God created anything He came up with a plan. He saw the Messiah and saw him slain. Rev 13:8 KJV And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Yeshua was not slain twice! God saw this plan in the beginning and he also saw you there.
From item 5 above:
mean the same thing.
We use the best words we can to convey what we are trying to
communicate. I understand that the Old Testament was written by the
direction of Yahweh through His Spirit. The 'New Testament' was
written in entirety by Yahweh's children through Yahweh's
understanding given to them by His helper. We do our best to
communicate but no matter what words we choose to use, anyone reading
them could (and will) understand them differently . This is why
Yahshua spoke in parables and used metaphors. He is showing us how to
'read' scripture. Scripture was written to be descriptive so that all
of Yahweh's children would not be bound to man's narrow understanding,
but released by His agape understanding.
>Eph 1:4 KJV According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: So, because of the plan, the world was created. The Plan was not God, it belonged to God. And guess what? The Plan or the promise is now made flesh He has come! That is what John is trying to tell us. John goes on in verse 18 to say that no man has ever seen God at any time. He was not confused. He in no way was saying that Yeshua was God. He did not contradict himself, or the Torah.
What is the world? What is the earth? Defining these things with
meanings your teachers have interpreted based on man's strict
definitions of the words they know places all of scripture as
something physical. The world and the earth is more than a mass of
elements that orbits the sun in the Milky Way galaxy.
Using your word 'Plan':
Verse 1: In the beginning was [the Plan], and[the Plan] was with
Yahweh, and [the Plan] was Yahweh (Yahweh's).
Verse 14: [The Plan] became flesh and made his dwelling among us ,,.
It projects the same thing.
>Is it no wonder the Jews have such problems with Christianity? We read John 1 and formulate all this doctrine that contradicts the Shema (God is 1), Isaiah 44 and tons of verses where God alone created the heavens and the earth, Proverbs where "Wisdom" is a woman, and the 3 verses in the Tanach that says God is not a man. And let's call a spade a spade - due to John 1 theology we come to believe as a tenant of our faith in reincarnation. That the Eternal Son was inserted into a human being or as a human being. That's reincarnation and never stated in the NT. It is based in John 1. These are some heavy baggage to carry due to a poem.
scripture describes the spiritual by using physical descriptions to
help us understand. If people do not have access to Yahweh's helper
then they are locked into the physical world of man and there is no
understanding of Yahweh's spiritual realm.
There is no 'reincarnation' - only new birth described in many places
in scripture. Consider it - by defining all of scripture as something
physical then what does it say about Yahweh?
>So this "poetry" can create a lot of false doctrine.
metaphors. i.e. "poetry". Surely you are not saying that Yahweh
created false doctrine through his Son Yahshua?
>Be careful folks of arriving at theology that is only assumed here and goes against the Torah. Either John was a Jew who thought and wrote like a Jew or he was a heretic. Your choice.
at first glance. What I am sharing does not go against the Torah - it
goes against your knowledge of the Torah.
Thank you John and Shalom,
Ray
> Rev 13:8 KJV And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose
> names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the
> foundation of the world.
> Yeshua was not slain twice! God saw this plan in the beginning and he also
> saw you there.
>
> Eph 1:4 KJV According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of
> the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
> So, because of the plan, the world was created. The Plan was not God, it
> belonged to God. And guess what? The Plan or the promise is now made flesh
Fancier Quinn
Hear, O Israel: The L-rd is our God; the L-rd is one.
Shema means Hear with the intent of obey
Echad - ONE, can be a unity as is dinette set consisting of a table and 4 chairs or it is used in the singular as in:
Numbers 35:30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person [to cause him] to die.
Deuteronomy 17:6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; [but] at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Deuteronomy 19:15 One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
--
"If you don't understand weapons, you don't understand fighting. If
you don't understand fighting you don't understand war. If you don't
understand war you don't understand history. If you don't understand
history, you might as well live with your head in a sack." an unknown
Jewish sage
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee.
Psalms 122:6
Ray
I always go back to what I've posted to see what I've said and many
times I find I could have used a different choice of words.
I wrote this in the last sentence of my last reply to you:
to be inflammatory or degrading. No matter how many times I try to
proof what I type, I always find I could have said things a little
better. I am sure your knowledge of the Torah far exceeds mine - it's
our understanding of it that's different.
Thanks again,
Ray
>
> > 4. The Word is not God. God created the word. An improper reading of
> John
> > 1 can get you into trouble! And if you look carefully at the Greek, you
> > will notice 2 different Greek words are used in John 1 for "God". John
> was
> > telling us that in the beginning was the word and the word was God's.
>
John Medwin
|
Please Fancier - I can't believe you are saying that 'echad' means a unity. You of all people/peoples. Echad means ONE. Period. Not unity, not a unity of one, just one. These were slaves and children. They did not break things down into molecules and components. If you had a cake, a Hebrew did not say it was a unity of flour, eggs, and sugar. No, it was a cake. It was not a unity. This is a Greek concept. "The two should be one flesh" meant, they were one and don't you dare try to split them up. There is a Hebrew word for unity and it is "yachad", which is about several members having things in common. YHWH is not a unity. It is this erroneous echad teaching that gives way for the pagan concept of YHWH taking various forms or shapes, yet all YHWH. There is no difference in that teaching and Greek mythology - "god" taking various shapes or personalities. I know that is not what you believe, but the lack of understanding of 'echad' lays the foundation for such NT garbage.
-------Original Message------- |
|
|
John Medwin
|
Ray, I do not dispute that Yeshua is the Son of God. But John 1 does not say in the beginning was the Son. The "Word" of John 1:1 is an "it" not a "he." Or not at least until the KJV of 1611 came about. Here is a sampling of what you find in versions prior to KJV:
Bishops 1658 - Joh 1:3 All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made. Geneva 1599 - Joh 1:3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.
"IT", the word, is not a person. IT is the Plan or Promise. Not until verse 14 do we find that the Plan has taken on flesh, which is his birth.
And don't forget that Wisdom in Proverbs is a woman.
Pro 1:20 Wisdom crieth aloud in the street; She uttereth her voice in the broad places;So was Yeshua really a woman? No. John is doing what the Scriptures often do, put human traits on objects to paint a picture, not to be taken literally. Yeshua is the plan that finally came.Ray, you ask:
|
Is Yahshua divine? He was created in the image of his Father. He was
|
Given authority over heaven and earth.
Think about it. Yeshua was GIVEN authority, just as you stated. Who gives authority? Who receives authority? A divine being cannot receive authority or he is not divine. Acts 4:12 says Yeshua was given his name. He is never spoken of as being the name above all names. It is the lesser who receives from the greater. No one gave YHWH his Name. But Yeshua received his name from YHWH. They are not the same. YHWH is greater than the son. And there is only ONE God. Supreme means only one, the one at the top. Only YHWH is said to be at the top. Anything less than YHWH cannot be YHWH (or Divine). Hope that makes sense.
|
John Medwin
|
One more note on "echad". It is said the root word for echad (Storngs #259) is achad (#258), which means unity. The problem is #258, achad, is not in the Tanach. #258 is only used one time, and it does not mean unity, nor is the word achad:
Eze 21:16 Go thee one way or other,258 either on the right hand,3231 or on the left,8041 whithersoever575 thy face6440 is set.3259 Trouble is the Hebrew here for #258 is actually "Hitachadiy", which as you can see is translated as "go thee one way or other". So somebody, please tell me where "unity" comes from in this? |
'echâd
Ekh-awd'
A numeral from H258; properly united, that is, one; or (as an ordinal) first: - a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any
One: 687 times
First: 36 times
Another:35 times
Other: 30 times
Any: 18 times
Once: 13 times
Eleven: 13 times
Every: 10 times
Certain: 9 times
An: 7 times
Some: 7 times
And miscellaneous other translations: 87 times
Shabbat Shalom
John Medwin
|
Ray, tell me you didn't say that - you are about to eat shrimp? Not to get personal or anything, but looks like we need to study kosher laws here... Who wants to start a new thread? This forum is about walking in Torah, right?
-------Original Message-------
|
Subject: [Narrow Gate 1662] Re: The Word - John 1 Hello John (and all),
There have been so many things filling my days and keeping me from
relaxing over the past several weeks. I had not intended to let your
earlier reply go so long without my response but life is like this
sometimes. In that time period I tried to spend quality time with my
number two son until he deployed to protect convoys in Iraq, have
helped my daughter and her husband pack and move (transferring much of
their things to my house until they settle), have traveled to four
different cities, and have moved temporarily to the fourth city 450
miles from my home to work. All of us have necessary obligations and
distractions like this - it's the way life is.
The doctrine you speak of in John 1 is not just developed there and I
think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying about who Yahshua and
our Father and His Spirit are. I don't worship three gods - I worship
One. I clearly see a Family structure in His make-up - three AS one.
This constitutes His spiritual image which is physically visible to us
through our families. A family does not exist without a provider, a
helper and a child all of which are described extensively throughout
scripture.
I want to provide how I understand this in a new thread "The Book of
John" at this link:
Of course this thread is open too. I need to glean through it again.
I have been so busy with work - up at 4:30 am, home at around 6:30 pm,
six days a week seventy mile round trip, working at a job I like but
one I'm getting to old to physically do (yada, yada, yada). Little
time to relax. I'm in Baton Rouge La right now and right after I
finish this post I'm driving to find some shrimp and Cajun boiled
crawfish south of New Orleans in a little city called Belle Chasse. I
know the spot and I go out of my way to eat there anytime I'm in this
part of the country. This will be my first real time out in two weeks.
My last day off I was sick. Such is life!
Shalom,
Ray |
> ...
>
> read more >>
>
> faint_grain.jpg
> 1KViewDownload
>
> imstp_pets_cat1_en.gif
> 47KViewDownload- Hide quoted text - |
|
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
John Medwin
|
Ray, thought you might want to throw this in the mix with your John 1.
Pro 8:23-30 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, Before the earth was. (24) When there were no depths, I was brought forth, When there were no fountains abounding with water. (25) Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills was I brought forth; (26) While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, Nor the beginning of the dust of the world. (27) When he established the heavens, I was there: When he set a circle upon the face of the deep, (28) When he made firm the skies above, When the fountains of the deep became strong, (29) When he gave to the sea its bound, That the waters should not transgress his commandment, When he marked out the foundations of the earth; (30) Then I was by him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before him,So who is this that was there in the beginning? The answer is listed after Chapter 8:
Pro 9:1 Wisdom hath builded her house; She hath hewn out her seven pillars:So did John not get the memo? Didn't John know that in the beginning was the Son? Or is this exactly what John was writing about? Wisdom is the plan of God and contains his promised one. So for those that say that Yeshua was there at the beginning, I'd like for you to tell me who this woman is who was there also. Obviously, this is simply a Hebraic from of expression - to put human attributes on the purpose and plan of God. John 1 is doing the exact same thing. He is trying to tell us that the Promised One has now come.
So who did those who knew him say that he was?
Joh 1:49 Nathanael answered him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art King of Israel.Mat 16:15-16 He saith unto them, But who say ye that I am? (16) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.Mat 27:54 KJV Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God unto you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you, even as ye yourselves know; Act 3:22-23 Moses indeed said, A prophet shall the Lord God raise up unto you from among your brethren, like unto me. To him shall ye hearken in all things whatsoever he shall speak unto you. (23) And it shall be, that every soul that shall not hearken to that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.1Ti 2:5 KJV For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;Rev 1:6 KJV And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him [be] glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.Has anybody in the NT ever spoken of Yeshua as God or as 'divine'? No. But perhaps we best examine what it means to be the "Son of God". The phrase is only used once in all the Tanach:
Dan 3:25 KJV He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.So, did they really think that YHWH Himself was in the fire with the Hebrews? That is not how Hebrews thought. But look ahead for further clarity:
Dan 3:28 KJV [Then] Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed [be] the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God.Notice that they knew that GOD sent HIS ANGEL. The angel was the one like the Son of God.
Luk 3:38 KJV Which was [the son] of Enos, which was [the son] of Seth, which was [the son] of Adam, which was [the son] of God.Notice here that Adam is the son of God. The son of God was one sent of God. He was God's Man. Yeshua was that man, the son of Elohim. But there are too many places that call him a man after the resurrection. This son of God was also called the servant of YHWH. It's time we stop confusing the two. Eze 34:23-24 KJV And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, [even] my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. (24) And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken [it]. |
Moderator
On Jan 19, 11:07 am, Ray <marriedpl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I'm in Baton Rouge La right now and right after I
> finish this post I'm driving to find some shrimp and Cajun boiled
> crawfish south of New Orleans in a little city called Belle Chasse.
much more are an ABOMINATION to YHVH. Abomination is the strongest
negative word you can find in the Hebrew scripture, equivalent to
disgusting, putrid, abhorrent, etc. Everything that was disgusting to
YHVH is still so. We are to avoid it at all costs.
I have just began a new topic "You're Eating What?". An article about
this has been in our "Files" section for about a year and I posted 5
audio files several months ago. Look into it.
~ Moderator
Ray
The words of Yahshua as recorded in Matthew 15 state (see chapter 15
for full text):
10 Yahshua called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand.
11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what
comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "
15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."
16 "Are you still so dull?" Yahshua asked them. 17"Don't you see that
whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the
body?
18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and
these make a man 'unclean.'
Yahshua was talking about the washing of hands yet as I understand
this statement of his it includes all things.
This is echoed in Acts 10 with these accounts of Peter's vision:
9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and
approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray.
10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal
was being prepared, he fell into a trance.
11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let
down to earth by its four corners.
12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles
of the earth and birds of the air.
13 Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."
14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything
impure or unclean."
15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure
that God has made clean."
16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken
back to heaven.
Peter related his vision to other apostles in Acts 11.
I didn't mean to offend anyone and I will try my best not to provide
personal information like that on this board again. I didn't have a
clue that what I said was wrong in any way.
I asked you guys what books and translations you study from and the
information I got is that it's primarily the same things I'm studying
from, only what you say and what the translations say seem to be
different. I downloaded e-sword and I'm trying to utilize it. I am not
Jewish. Yahshua gave the gift of Yahweh's eternal salvation to the
Samaritans in John 4. Peter ate 'unclean' foods to carry the salvation
of Yahweh to the gentiles.
(Sigh) I have removed the post where I provided that information and I
do apologize for offending you and anyone else. I will try to review
your resources about what foods can and can't be eaten to understand
the topic better.
Ray
John Medwin
|
Please don't take offense, Ray. That's the whole purpose of this forum, to help us learn how to walk. Keep in mind these key verses:
1Jo 2:6 KJV He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.Mat 5:17-19 ASV Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.So for starters, as NT believers, we need to walk how the Messiah walked. And the Messiah believed and walked in Torah.
Now concerning the verses you brought up. The first thing we need to do is define food. For any Jew, pig and scrimp was not food. You might as well as talk about eating a rock. It simply was not food. The reason was God already told them what they could eat and what they could not and there is no changing that. In Lev 11, God defines what was acceptable and what was not. They He says this:
Lev 11:44-45 cjb For I am ADONAI your God; therefore, consecrate yourselves and be holy, for I am holy; and do not defile yourselves with any kind of swarming creature that moves along the ground. (45) For I am ADONAI, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt to be your God. Therefore you are to be holy, because I am holy.Holy is set apart. We are to be set apart, not like the nations.
Now to your examples. Look at what the conversation in Matt 15 was all about:
Mat 15:2 ASV Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they wash not their hands when they eat bread.The question was not was is clean and what is unclean. The question became can eating with unclean hands make a clean food (bread) unclean. Today, we try and make it a matter of can we turn an unclean food into a clean food. Can saying a prayer of thanksgiving turn a greasy bacon cheeseburger into a wholesome clean food. The answer is NO! Clean and unclean is already set. So whenever you read of food in the NT, pork and seafood is never in the discussion.
Now as to Acts 10, we can see that Peter was not eating unclean foods and this was some 25 years after the cross. So did Peter not get the memo? He must not have thought what you did, Ray, about what Yeshua said in Matt 15. Then we need to ask, was Peter teaching error for these 25 years? But let's see what the sheets were really all about:
Act 10:28 ASV and he said unto them, Ye yourselves know how it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to join himself or come unto one of another nation; and yet unto me hath God showed that I should not call any man common or unclean:Peter knew that God could not be changing his mind. Jews gave up their lives in the days of Macabees before they would eat pork. But now Peter gets it. The vision was not about food but about Gentiles. 3 sheets, and 3 gentiles show up.
Ray, do a study on the effects of eating unclean foods. You will see that they are medically nasty foods related to all sorts of diseases and afflictions. Funny how God says something and we can find reason to ignore Him. Yet get a doctor to say the same thing and we do exactly what he says. They have performed thousands of autopsies on the mummies of Egypt and found that the diseases of the Egyptians were: heart disease, hardening of the arteries, obesity... The same things the church suffers from. We ignore God and pay the price.
I encourage you to take the time and study the links that the moderator sent. They are well worth the time.
-------Original Message-------
|
Fancier Quinn
The Trinity in the Shema?
 |
|
|
||
| ||||
John Medwin
|
No, Rabbi Singer knows more Hebrew than I ever will. He just happens to be wrong on this. He has bought into the Christian silliness.
I was with him all the way until he used the dreaded phrase "compound unity". That I totally reject, no matter who says it. Numbers 13 does not refer to a compound unity, but to "one cluster" or "echad eshkole". Neither echad (one) nor eshkole (cluster) means anything like a compound unity. Nothing in the root word ever hints at a "compound unity". If echad meant unity, there would be no need for the word cluster.
Let's use some common sense here. Suppose all the grapes were not ripe. Some were sour. Some were green. Does that still comprise of a 'compound unity'? Suppose the man and woman who were "one flesh" hated each other and on the point of divorce. Is that still a compound unity? You may have one of something with there being no unity involved. One explosion. One insane asylum. One schizophrenic. The only reason we think "compound unity" is because we have always been given examples that make you think that way. You can have one of something that is totally chaotic or in conflict.
Any way you look at it, one is a number. We do not care how many soldiers make up one army. We do not care how many parts make up one car. One car is still one car. Ancient Hebrews did not dissect things or look at things under the microscope. One tree meant one tree no matter how many leaves or branches are on it. When we say we will be gone for one day, we don't really care how many seconds are in that day. No, the number is pointing you to "day" and to think in terms of "day", and not in seconds. The whole purpose of "one" is to keep you from looking any further. If I wanted you to think in terms of feet, I would say drive one mile. Sorry, but I do not think of one day as being a compound unity of any other components. And I don't think that Abraham or Moses would either.
The whole thing is stupid. One means one and 'unity' or being made up of many members, or molecules has nothing to do with it. When YHWH says He is one, the last thing He expects anybody to do is to dissect Him into a 'compound unity'.
If echad does not mean one, what Hebrew word does? Tell me what Hebrew word means one without a compound unity. Isn't it odd that when we say "one" in English, we think in terms of the number only? When we say "one" in Hebrew, we think like Greeks and over analyze things. |
John Medwin
|
Oopps - made a boo boo... This is the corrected one...
|
-------Original Message-------
No, Rabbi Singer knows more Hebrew than I ever will. He just happens to be wrong on this. He has bought into the Christian silliness.
I was with him all the way until he used the dreaded phrase "compound unity". That I totally reject, no matter who says it. Numbers 13 does not refer to a compound unity, but to "one cluster" or "echad eshkole". Neither echad (one) nor eshkole (cluster) means anything like a compound unity. Nothing in the root word ever hints at a "compound unity". If echad meant unity, there would be no need for the word cluster.
Let's use some common sense here. Suppose all the grapes were not ripe. Some were sour. Some were green. Does that still comprise of a 'compound unity'? Suppose the man and woman who were "one flesh" hated each other and on the point of divorce. Is that still a compound unity? You may have one of something with there being no unity involved. One explosion. One insane asylum. One schizophrenic. The only reason we think "compound unity" is because we have always been given examples that make you think that way. You can have one of something that is totally chaotic or in conflict.
|
Any way you look at it, one is a number. We do not care how many soldiers make up one army. We do not care how many parts make up one car. One car is still one car. Ancient Hebrews did not dissect things or look at things under the microscope. One tree meant one tree no matter how many leaves or branches are on it. When we say we will be gone for one day, we don't really care how many seconds are in that day. No, the number 1 is pointing you to "day" and to think in terms of "day", and not in seconds. The whole purpose of "one" is to keep you from looking any further. If I wanted you to think in terms of feet, I would NOT say drive one mile. Sorry, but I do not think of one day as being a compound unity of any other components. And I don't think that Abraham or Moses would either. |
NarrowGateGroup
Greetings Ray,
On Jan 19, 7:59 pm, Ray <marriedpl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The words of Yahshua as recorded in Matthew 15 state (see chapter 15
> for full text):
> 10 Yahshua called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand.
> 11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what
> comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "
> 15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."
> 16 "Are you still so dull?" Yahshua asked them. 17"Don't you see that
> whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the
> body?
> 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and
> these make a man 'unclean.'
>
> Yahshua was talking about the washing of hands yet as I understand
> this statement of his it includes all things.
You’re right! This WAS about washing of hands, not about what was eaten with those washed or unwashed hands. Yahoshea was condemning the TRADITIONS of the Pharisees, which they had placed above the Commandments of YHVH! This included their ritualistic washing of hands in a specific manner a specific number of times this way and that way before eating and doing many other things.
You are wrong when you say it “includes all things.” It doesn’t. This is a common Christian teaching just like abolishing YHVH’s Shabbath, Festivals and changing His name to whatever is popular. We have no authority to do any of this.
MattithYah chapter 15 was a lesson to show them (or us) that what came out of their mouth, their words, indicated what was really in their heart and was FAR more important than their traditions of washing their hands a certain way or a specified number of times. It WAS about their traditions, NOT about what they ate.
Continuing with Ray’s statement:
> This is echoed in Acts 10 with these accounts of Peter's vision:
> 9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and
> approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray.
> 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal
> was being prepared, he fell into a trance.
> 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let
> down to earth by its four corners.
> 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles
> of the earth and birds of the air.
> 13 Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."
> 14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything
> impure or unclean."
> 15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure
> that God has made clean."
> 16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken
> back to heaven.
Once again, this is NOT about food at all! Read it in context.
The entire episode was to show Kepha/‘Peter’ that the GENTILES, specifically the household of Cornelius, were NOT to be considered unclean. It was the GENTILES that were being “made clean” because of their attitude of heart just as Yahoshea had said in MattithYah 15, NOT food!
The most detestable example that YHVH could have shown Kepha was this one of telling him to eat these “creeping things.” Why? Because this was an abomination to YHVH and to Kepha!
Without this extreme example, Kepha would never have gone with the “unclean” Gentiles who were immediately calling out for him as soon as he came out of the rooftop “trance” where he was given this vision.
Act 10:20 "But rise up, go down and go with them, not doubting at all, for I have sent them."
Gentiles were considered unclean. No Yahudim/‘Jew’ would have traveled, eaten, stayed, or fellowshipped with them. This had nothing to do with food at all. Why do you think Kepha took six Yahudim brothers with him when he went to the house of Cornelius? Because he was going to need witnesses to back him up:
Act 10:45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Kepha, because the gift of the Set-apart Spirit had been poured out on the gentiles also,
When Kepha returned, he was called on the carpet to explain his actions:
Act 11:1-3 And the emissaries and brothers who were in Yehudah heard that the gentiles also received the word of YHVH. And when Kepha went up to Yerushalayim, those of the circumcision were contending with him, saying, "You went in to uncircumcised men and ate with them!"
Why did they say this? Because Gentiles (uncircumcised) were UNCLEAN according to all that they had previously understood and believed! It’s not about food…it never was! Now Kepha must explain why he went to the “unclean” Gentiles:
Act 11:4-7 But Kepha began and set it forth in order, saying: "I was in the city of Yapho praying. And in a trance I saw a vision, a certain vessel descending like a great sheet, let down from the heaven by four corners, and it came to me. "Having looked into it, I perceived and I saw four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping creatures, and the birds of heaven. And I heard a voice saying to me, 'Rise up, Kepha, slay and eat.'
Act 11:8-10 "But I said, 'Not at all, Master! Because whatever is common or unclean has never entered into my mouth.' And the voice answered me again from the heaven, 'What Elohim has cleansed you do not consider common.' And this took place three times, and all were drawn up again into the heaven.”
Here is the reason for the vision Kepha received from YHVH:
Act 11:11, 12 "And see, immediately three men stood before the house where I was, having been sent to me from Caesarea. And the Spirit said to me to go with them, not doubting at all. And these six brothers also went with me, and we went into the man's house.
They weren’t inviting him over for BBQ pork ribs or bacon and eggs. Look at what the same chapter says about where Kepha was headed:
Act 10:1 Now there was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a captain of what was called the Italian Regiment, dedicated, and fearing YHVH with all his household, doing many kind deeds to the people, and praying to YHVH always.
This man, Cornelius, was “dedicated, and fearing YHVH with all his household,” and “praying to YHVH always.” Do you think maybe he knew something about YHVH? How about Torah? What about the Law of Mosheh or YHVH’s dietary laws?
The ways of the Yahudim and the commandments of YHVH were well known by those who were in close association with the Yahudim. Could you imagine Cornelius, knowing and yet willfully breaking the commandments of YHVH, still being given the gift of the Set-Apart Spirit? No way!
Act 10:3-5 He clearly saw in a vision, about the ninth hour of the day, a messenger of YHVH coming to him, and saying to him, "Cornelius!" And looking intently at him, and becoming afraid, he said, "What is it, master?" And he said to him, "Your prayers and your kind deeds have come up for a remembrance before YHVH. And now send men to Yapho, and send for Shimʽon who is also called Kepha.
His prayers were about to be answered and his kind deeds were going to be rewarded! Why? Because he WAS following YHVH’s commandments – that’s why YHVH chose Cornelius and his household to be the first of the “unclean” Gentiles to be “made clean.”
This is exactly what Shaul was speaking of in Romans when he said:
Rom 2:26-29 So, if an uncircumcised one watches over the righteousnesses of the Torah, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned as circumcision? And the uncircumcised by nature, who perfects the Torah, shall judge you who notwithstanding letter and circumcision are a transgressor of the Torah! For he is not a Yahudite who is so outwardly, neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But a Yahudite is he who is so inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in Spirit, not literally, whose praise is not from men but from Elohim.
After Kepha recounts the experience, the Yahudim that came together to chew him out were speechless!
Act 11:17, 18 if Elohim gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Master יהושע Messiah, how was I able to withstand Elohim?" And having heard this, they were silent, and praised YHVH, saying, "Then YHVH has indeed also given to the gentiles repentance to life."
This was a complete package to show what YHVH had done and it had NOTHING to do with what we eat!
~ Moderator
Fancier Quinn
Moderator
On Jan 19, 8:57 pm, "Fancier Quinn" <fancierqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So you are saying that The Creator Who does not change, Who gave instruction
> on what to eat and what not to eat, suddenly does not care what you eat. How
> can yopu say that the "son" upholds the commandments of the "father" if he
Ray may be saying that "food does not matter," but the 'NT' does NOT!
This is Ray's current understanding. I believe he is wrong. You
believe he is wrong. John believes he is wrong. But that does NOT mean
that the 'New' Testament scripture is wrong!
You are DECEIVED in your view of the 'New' Testament writings. Just
like most 'Christians,' you believe the same lies, twisting, wrong
assumptions and incorrect conclusions about what Shaul wrote or
Yahoshea said.
Well, you are just as wrong as those 'Christians' you seem to loathe!
Quinn wrote:
> ... This is another case where the nt violates Torah.
No, it isn't - and it doesn't!
Once more you try to apply the same tired 'Christian' errors to every
Torah-obedient believer in Yahoshea. The very fact that we are
obedient to Torah and follow the 'NT' renders your above statement
impotent!
Are you blind to what has been shared on this forum? How long will you
continue to propound a lie? We do NOT believe that the 'NT' violates
Torah. If you had understanding of what was actually said in the 'NT'
instead of accepting what has been commonly but incorrectly reported
and believed, you would see that.
Read my reply to Ray's last post and see how the records that he
quotes in MattithYah and Acts are misunderstood by nearly the entire
'Christian' community - AND YOU!
They are wrong because they misunderstand what they read! And you are
wrong to agree with their wrong interpretation of the (so-called)
'New' Testament! It's NOT "new" - it supports and is in complete
agreement with ALL Hebrew Scripture!
"You do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of YHVH."
~ Moderator
Fancier Quinn
Yeshayahu - Isaiah - Chapter 65
4. They sit among the graves, and with corpses they lodge; those who eat swine flesh, and broth of abominations is in their vessels.Chapter 66
3. Whoever slaughters an ox has slain a man; he who slaughters a lamb is as though he beheads a dog; he who offers up a meal-offering is [like] swine blood; he who burns frankincense brings a gift of violence; they, too, chose their ways, and their soul desired their abominations.17. "Those who prepare themselves and purify themselves to the gardens, [one] after another in the middle, those who eat the flesh of the swine and the detestable thing and the rodent, shall perish together," says the Lord.
CHARLES HUFMAN
John Medwin
|
It depends on whose definition of kosher you use. Jewish tradition is complicated, expensive (requires virtually 2 kitchens to separate meat and cheese including the utensils used to prepare the dishes.)
Most Messianics, self included, stick to the Scriptures - Lev 11. The long and the short of it - no pork, seafood - unless it is fish with scales. But today, in order to avoid those foods you must read labels. Even things like some turkey bacon may be seasoned with pork. That is the best place to start.
What you will find: eating becomes an act of worship. Do you eat pepperoni pizza or eat a cheese pizza to please Yah? Worship. You'll find your kids begin to read the labels on food, because they love knowing the limits that Yah places on us. And if they read the labels on the food they eat, what do you think they will do when it comes time to find a mate? That's right - they'll look closely there too.
Once that becomes a way of life, they you will want to get even better at it - noting which products have pork gelatin and other unclean additives. The moderator has posted some great info on the web site.
Try it - you'll like it. For those who have never eaten to please the Father, you will find it exciting. There's something about walking in Torah because you know that this is how Yah wants us to live that stirs the soul. And your health may see some dramatic improvement.
Enjoy!
-------Original Message-------
|
|
|
Fancier Quinn
CHARLES HUFMAN
CHARLES HUFMAN
----- Original Message -----From: Fancier Quinn
John Medwin
|
Charles - I think as a whole, we don't even understand the words of Yeshua concerning what comes out of our mouth. Some have posted recently, that it was justification for eating whatever you want. But even here we fail to note the difference between sin and being unclean.
Being unclean is not sin - it is being unworthy for sacrifice. Yeshua would have been unclean from healing lepers to being born. But that is not a sin to be unclean. Yeshua says our words can make us unclean, very true. But eating pork is sin, an abomination to YHWH. That is not in the same league as being unclean.
So does eating condemn us to damnation? Well, it puts us in a state of sin and uncleanness. So is eating a salvation thing? Yes! (talk about opening another can of worms!) Of course it all depends on your definition of salvation. If you think salvation is saying a prayer, then you will most certainly disagree with me. But if you see salvation as a walk - something you do with fear and trembling - then you will see it linked to how we walk.
1Jo 2:3-4 ASV And hereby we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. (4) He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
I eat according to Torah because my Father desires me to do as He says. Our salvation is a process, not an event. And yes, our health is part of the salvation process.
-------Original Message-------
|
Fancier Quinn
Ray
I don’t remember how TNG appeared in my path but I’m glad I found it.
This is a place where I have been able to post some of the things I am
learning in scripture without all of the derogatory and hateful
remarks by people who despise it. I wasn’t accepted by everyone here
but I wasn’t rejected either. For me, it’s like spending time in a
lush and beautiful garden.
Thank you for your explanation of Peter and his vision of unclean
foods. It is well written and well thought through.
I was rocked by your response to me Saturday night.
Sunday while I was taking my breaks at work I wrote a fairly lengthy
(and what I think was a well written) response but I did not have time
to finish it. That response expressed some anger. When I made it back
to my motel room Sunday night I had calmed a little and composed a
shorter (and what I think was a well written) second response. That
one expressed some sadness. It was started about 6:30 and I was still
looking at it at 9:30 when I realized I had to shower and go to sleep
as 4:30 am comes early. I came close to posting it several times but
something was missing and I couldn’t do it.
I was lying in bed with the lights out for what might have been a long
time and I began to see the relationship and I thought I knew the
answer. When I put it on paper it didn’t quite hold water. It took
another day of thinking about it and now I can explain what I
understand about these foods.
I’ll start by briefly offering a discourse on two subjects –
‘Tradition’, and ‘What we physically take in’.
First – Tradition:
Perhaps 15 years ago I came across a local newspaper article that
caught my attention so well that I cut it out and have kept it. I’ve
had many opportunities to toss it but I always reread it and it
remains. This worn article is in my work desk over 450 miles from here
but I still remember enough about it to share what it says. As I
recall, the article presented the names of these people.
A young girl was watching her mother prepare a supper roast and she
saw her cut off one end before she placed it in a somewhat large
cooking pan. The girl had seen this before but this time she asked her
mother why she did it. Her mom said she did it because that’s what her
mother did and it had never occurred to her to question her mother
why. Both of them then went her mother (the child’s grandmother) to
ask about the roast. Her answer echoed the first answer, and she
called HER mother (the child’s great grandmother) to ask why this was
done. Once again, the answer was the same. Fortunately for them, her
mother (the child’s great-great grandmother) was still living and all
of them went to her and asked “Why did you cut off an end of your
roasts before you cooked them?” Well, she had the answer and her
answer was this: “Why, to make it fit into the pan, of course.” She
went on to say the roasts available to her at that time were too large
to fit into her cooking pan and she had to cut off a little of each
one in order to make them fit. This is a true story, carried unto the
forth generation!
How often the meanings of traditions or instructions are forgotten or
misunderstood and are blindly carried forward into our future
generations.
Second – What we physically take in:
I will address below some of what is NOT written into scripture about
things we take into our bodies to put the reason of my understanding
into perspective.
I could be wrong with some of this but as far as I know there is
nothing written in scripture about working with chemicals or
radioactive materials or drinking municipal water treated with
chlorine or fluorine. There is nothing about breathing in air filled
with asbestos dust or any other fine airborne particulates known to be
harmful to our health or well being. There is nothing about petroleum
burning vehicles or pollutants dumped on or in to our environment for
pleasure or the production of food or electrical power or anything
else. Nothing is mentioned about mandatory medical injections (or any
medicines for that matter). Nothing is mentioned about adding
chemicals to the foods we eat or drink or about living in the constant
EMF flux fields of 60 cycle ac (house power) or other man-made
portable RF or radiating energy fields.
Foods and the containers they are stored in that have been processed
with electrical power have shared in our environmental problems,
Kosher foods included. I am sure you know it is unsafe to eat fish
caught from an increasing number of rivers and bodies of water in and
around our country (and others) due to heavy metals and other
contaminants. These foods are potentially dangerous no matter how many
times they’re blessed. The ground waters in many areas of our world,
once pure and plentiful are now putrid or gone. (I have seen chemical
sludge come from a friend’s well that used to be safe for drinking
north of where I live). Almost every country has dead zones in the
oceans at the mouths of their rivers and they are growing larger every
day not because of mans need, but because of man’s greed.
As Yahweh loves all of his children past, present and future, physical
health alone would not have been the intent of His strict eating
requirements found in Leviticus 11.
There’s quite a bit of information in scripture about Abraham. It
seems to me that Yahweh incredibly blessed him, and Abraham and his
people ate whatever they wanted (with one restriction).
Genesis 9 states: 1 Then Yahweh blessed Noah and his sons, saying to
them, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. 2 The
fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and
all the birds of the air, upon every creature that moves along the
ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your
hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as
I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.
The only restriction of eating the creatures that Yahweh gave Noah and
his family was this:
4 "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.”
Abraham and his family and their families ate whatever they wanted,
and they became a mighty nation that still exists today.
Forward ahead to Leviticus. Wow! There are lots and lots of detailed
requirements and restrictions about – everything! Whooa. Something
must have happened because Yahweh was very very angry.
Hmmm, I see that they just exited 400 years of bondage in hell – uh,
Egypt. Let’s see, the Egyptians were idol worshipers so I’m pretty
confident these ex slaves worshiped all kinds of animals while they
were there. Rabbits are fertile, and eagles have excellent vision, and
the great cats have stealth and strength. I’m sure they saw scavengers
work through a few carcasses of whatever and I imagine they figured
that those animals had some kind of powers too, you know, like maybe
they seemed immune to the sickness or death caused by eating rotted
meat. Beyond food, Israel’s men and women of all ages were the sexual
playthings of those who wanted them. Their women bore Egyptian
children. All of these people were raised from infancy into a culture
of pleasure and pain as slaves and some of them drank blood and ate
the flesh from various animals to try to gain the qualities of those
animals. Some of them made sacrifices to Egyptian idols and gods
because they felt that Yahweh had forgotten them. They learned to lie
and deceive and their religious leaders struggled to keep them
together because even after 400 years of all of this, some of them
still knew of Yahweh.
They were certainly mistreated and abused, but being in bondage meant
they had the welfare handouts of the Egyptians. They were fed and
housed and clothed. Yet as badly as they were abused they WANTED to go
back to the pleasure and the pain and the abuse and the idols and the
sacrifices and the food. Yahweh said NO to them and he established
control over every aspect of their lives. They HAD to obey him or they
would die before they moved on, and that entire generation did just
that – they died before the next generation was allowed to move on.
Their re-training was so intense that they carried it forward with
them and over the years their religious leaders even added to them and
placed themselves in prideful positions of power. They were blind
teachers carrying veiled traditions and bondage generation after
generation. But still, there were some whose hearts truly hungered to
know and understand Yahweh.
If the book of John can be believed (which I know has to be absolutely
true) Yahoshea offered Yahweh’s great kingdom with all of the rights
of His heirs to Samaritans. Good golly, the Jews at that time wouldn’t
even use the same dishes that the Samaritans used! Yet Yahoshea went
TO them and he stayed WITH them and they believed IN him and you know,
the living water of Yahweh flowed from within them just as he said it
would. Revelation 22 says that the river of the water of life flows
from the throne of Yahweh and the Lamb. I wonder what foods the
Samaritans ate?
You can look down on me for eating the foods that I do or for whatever
reasons you want and I will not point at you and say anything about
how you worship Yahweh because, Moderator, I can see you across the
grain field and I know you hear the same voice as I do. I think we’re
both focused on the right gate.
You have been more than kind in letting me post here. I am sure some
of what I have presented in this or any other thread is contrary to
your scriptural beliefs and traditions. I have tried very much to
respect you and the others I have interacted with, and I have truly,
truly enjoyed sharing what I have been learning from scripture.
I am very tired both physically and mentally. I won’t bother you with
what my past month has been like other than I really needed a lift
Saturday and I got punched and shoved at the end of it. It really
knocked the wind out of me and it took a few days to recover. It was
just what I needed.
I appreciate both of you, I truly do.
I miss my family so much. Even though I know I will return to some
stress I want to go home. If things work out I’ll be heading that way
next week.
Thanks again for allowing me to post.
Ray
Fancier Quinn
Kashrut: Connecting the Physical to the Spiritual
Eating affects our bodies. What about our souls?
Thousands of cookbooks have been written in the name of elevating the experience of eating to a higher level. As Jews, we are experts in the idea of elevating the experience of eating to something higher, not only because of our culinary preferences, but also because of our efforts to add spirituality to our lives through what and how we eat.
These dietary habits not only sanctify the fulfillment of this basic need, they also unite us with Jews around the world.
What is Kashrut?
Kashrut, or "keeping kosher," originates in the Torah and is further developed in later rabbinic literature. We keep kosher because it is God's mandate.
Yet, it goes beyond blind acceptance of some ancient laws. It gives us an opportunity to bring holiness into our lives several times a day through the simple act of eating and connects us with Jews all over the world.
Ethical concerns for all of God's creatures are central to keeping kosher. The system of kashrut also lends spiritual order to the chaos of the world by establishing categories of permitted and forbidden foods.
What makes something kosher?
Animals which have split hooves and chew their cud can be prepared kosher, including cows, sheep and even buffalo. This excludes most non-domesticated animals, as well as pigs. Most fowl, with the exception of birds of prey, can be prepared kosher.
According to Jewish law, meat and poultry must be slaughtered in a specific, humane manner, in order to minimize the pain the animal feels during the slaughtering, a process know as sh'hita (a shohet is the name of the trained professional who carries out the process).
Another critical element of kashrut is that the blood of an animal may not be eaten, reflecting a sensitivity to blood as life-force. Before the meat or poultry can be prepared for eating, it must be soaked and salted to drain it of blood.
Most kosher butchers and meat packers soak and salt their meat before packaging (it will usually say something like "kosher, soaked and salted" on the label).
In order for fish to be kosher, Jewish law stipulates that it must have both fins and scales. No specific ritual is necessary for slaughtering fish. Shellfish and mammalian fish are not kosher, since they do not have fins and scales.
The other essential aspect of keeping kosher is the prohibition against mixing milk and meat. Milk represents birth and life sustenance. Meat stands for flesh and death. Mixing them shows an insensitivity to life.
The Torah tells us this in basic terms three times (Exodus 23:19 and 34:26 and Deuteronomy 14:21) with the phrase: "Do not boil a kid in its mother's milk." Using these three citations, the rabbis, in later discussions, deduce three meanings for the prohibition on mixing milk and meat.
Cooking - Eating - Benefiting
Cooking is understood to refer not only to the combining of meat and dairy foods, but also to a requirement for separate cookware and utensils to prevent the mixing of milk and meat.
Eating includes the obvious, like cheeseburgers (which are, of course, prohibited), as well as waiting between eating meat and eating dairy so that the food is digested first.
Current opinions on how long one must wait after eating meat and before eating milk vary, ranging from the Dutch practice of waiting for one hour to an Eastern European custom of waiting six hours.
If your family has not passed down a custom, you may choose to adopt the prevailing custom in the Conservative Movement (and others) by waiting for three hours-After eating most dairy products and before eating meat or fowl, some people wait half an hour, while others simply rinse their mouths.
Benefiting means that a Jew should not prepare or provide or sell milk/meat mixtures (or any non-kosher foods) to anyone else, even if not technically doing the cooking.
Can I keep kosher?
Of course you can! There are thousands upon thousands who already incorporate kashrut into their daily lives. You can start by looking for foods with a mark of kosher certification known as a hekhsher.
There are a number of such certification marks. One should be careful with foods marked only with a "K," unless you know for certain that the product is under appropriate rabbinic supervision (the letter "K" is not a trademarked symbol).
You can phone or write the company to ask who provides their kashrut supervision. There are also websites which give regular kashrut updates. These can be found with a simple Internet search.
Fresh fruit and produce require no hekhsher, nor do canned or frozen fruits and vegetables which have nothing added. The Conservative Movement permits the eating of American-made cheese without a hekhsher, although there are Movement authorities who do require certification.
If you think you are in a place where finding food with a hekhsher is difficult, do not despair. It has never been easier to keep kosher, given the proliferation of kosher products on the marker.
There are hundreds of national brands on the shelves which have been prepared under supervision. If these are hard to find, try the health or vegetarian sections of your favorite food store.
You can also make any kitchen kosher. After everything is scrubbed clean, run the oven through the self-clean cycle or turn it to its highest temperature for one half hour.
Metal utensils and metal cookware should be thoroughly cleaned and immersed in boiling water. Broiler pans, baking pans and barbecue grills (things which do not rely on liquid in order to cook and come in direct contact with flame) need to be cleaned and heated until red hot.
Soak glassware for 72 hours, changing the water every 24 hours. Used porous materials (like wood and stoneware) cannot be made kosher, nor can plastics, which will melt if raised to the requisite high temperature
Don't forget!--you'll need .separate sets of dishes, cookware and utensils for both milk and meat (at separate times, of course). Although it is not strongly encouraged, under certain circumstances, you may use one set of glass dishes in your kitchen. And there are always paper plates--kosher and recyclable!
What if I share a kitchen with people who don't keep kosher?
You can still keep separate cookware, dishes and utensils, as well as sponges (one for meat, one for dairy) to go with them. Your food can be set aside in the cabinet and refrigerator.
Double wrapping in foil allows food to be heated in any oven. Be sure to explain your requirements to your roommates. Most will be surprisingly understanding!
There are too many rules. What can I do now?
Your rabbi is always available to you as resources for learning, guidance and specific questions. Our bibliography will be helpful as well.
When everyone else is eating without restrictions, or when that hamburger at the nearest fast-food restaurant seems so appealing, don't give up!
Living a life where your most basic and regular need has an aura of sanctity can be uplifting. It will give you a sense of connection with your people and it will infuse every day with spirituality and God's presence.
All of God's creatures eat to sustain their bodies. Kashrut also enables us to sustain our souls.
NarrowGateGroup
Greetings once more Ray,
Our forum is open to all who want to learn and to share what YHVH has taught them - their knowledge, experience, wisdom and ideas with others. That is the purpose of The Narrow Gate.
Consider that if YHVH does NOT require us to eat a “kosher” diet, by doing it anyway you have nothing to lose except giving up your desire for pork, shrimp, etc. If, on the other hand, He DOES require it, you have MUCH to lose by your disobedience.
Ray wrote:
> You can look down on me for eating the foods that I do or for whatever
> reasons you want and I will not point at you and say anything about
> how you worship Yahweh because, Moderator, I can see you across the
> grain field and I know you hear the same voice as I do. I think we’re
> both focused on the right gate.
“Look down on” you? Why? I’m surrounded with an entire community that thinks I’m the nutty one! I’m not saying anything about “how you worship.” This is not about who is right or who is wrong, it is about finding truth. I appreciate your thoughtful response and once again, your heart shows through in what you say.
On Jan 22, 3:56 pm, Ray wrote:
> … I’ll start by briefly offering a discourse on two subjects –
> ‘Tradition’, and ‘What we physically take in’.
>
> First – Tradition:
> … A young girl was watching her mother prepare a roast and she
> saw her cut off one end before she placed it in a somewhat large
> cooking pan.
I have used this same story to make a point many times. It is a perfect example of what has occurred with so many ‘religious’ rites, rituals, and doctrines. As is said, the blind lead the blind and both fall in the ditch. Or the traditions of men (or in the example stated, mother and grandmother) are placed above the Commandments of YHVH.
And you correctly stated:
> … How often the meanings of traditions or instructions are forgotten or
> misunderstood and blindly carried forward into our future generations.
This is where we must separate what is man’s tradition which we may disregard or ignore from what is a guideline or commandment from YHVH that is to be our obedient way of life.
You list many substances and practices that are potentially harmful. We all should be aware of those substances and practices that may compromise our health and our quality of life. I have condensed your list and explanation of cause and effect:
Ray wrote:
> Second – What we physically take in:
>
> I will address below some of what is NOT written into scripture about
> things we take into our bodies to put the reason of my understanding
> into perspective.
>
> I could be wrong with some of this but as far as I know there is
> nothing written in scripture about working with chemicals or
> radioactive materials… chlorine or fluorine… asbestos… petroleum
> burning vehicles…
> Nothing is mentioned about mandatory medical injections (or any
> medicines for that matter)… adding chemicals to foods…
> EMF flux fields… portable RF or radiating energy fields.
Ray, there are THOUSANDS of food substances and additives commonly in use today that simply didn’t exist or hadn’t been discovered when YHVH through Mosheh gave us Torah and the dietary laws in Wayyiqra/‘Leviticus.’ Some of these “modern” substances are very beneficial to our lives. Others extract a high price for their reported “benefit.”
There were also THOUSANDS of actions that were not possible when Torah was given such as speeding in an automobile, snow boarding, sky diving or hang gliding. All these are potentially deadly activities threatening life and limb.
Please examine very closely what you have written in the following several paragraphs. I will comment on each statement:
> As Yahweh loves all of his children past, present and future, physical
> health alone would not have been the intent of His strict eating
> requirements found in Leviticus 11.
We are on thin ice when we speak of what was YHVH’s “intent.” We cannot interpret YHVH’s intent else we presume to speak for Him and put words in His mouth that He did NOT say. Neither can we know His thoughts unless they are clearly expressed to us through His Word.
You are correct that Wayyiqra/‘Leviticus’ 11 is not about “health alone.” In fact, it’s not about health at all!
Not once does YHVH say that “clean” and “unclean” is about health – EVER! This is an assumption made by man, NOT stated by YHVH.
For centuries Christians and others have said that the reason for the dietary laws was YHVH’s concern for the health of His people. They are wrong. This is man’s reasoning, NOT YHVH’s. We all agree that our health should be and is a great concern, and that eating kosher is healthy but it is NOT the reason YHVH gives for the clean/unclean distinction of foods.
Think about this… how could the most powerful armies in the world of that time have possibly survived? The “unhealthy” and swine-consuming armies of the Persians, Greeks, Romans and others conquered the entire known world!
There must be something more to this… There is.
It is NOT about health. It IS about being set-apart from the rest of the unbelieving and disobedient world. Just like observing the seventh-day Sabbath sets us apart and draws a clear distinction between obedience and disobedience, the foods we eat also set us apart. We are set-apart to YHVH through our words and deeds which proceed from our heart.
Ray wrote:
> Abraham and his people ate whatever they wanted (with 1 restriction)
Did they? You quote Bereshith/ ‘Genesis’ 9 to support your statement. It doesn’t
Ray wrote:
> The only restriction of eating the creatures that Yahweh gave Noah and
> his family was this:
>
> (Genesis 9:4) "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.”
Let’s examine these statements in light of what YHVH commanded Noach more closely. When YHVH told Noach to take animals on the ark, there was a distinction between clean and unclean beasts:
Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
No explanation or definition of “clean” or “unclean’ is given to Noach. Why? Did he already know? Why 7 clean and only 2 unclean? We don’t find out what this means until YHVH defines it through Mosheh in Wayyiqra/‘Leviticus’ 11. After they exited the ark, we understand why there might be a need for more “clean” beasts:
Gen 8:20 And Noah builded an altar unto the YHVH; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
Why are only “clean” beasts offered to YHVH? There was no “Egyptian pagan idol worship” influence in Noach’s mind. YHVH was not concerned about His health being affected by these offerings. Why didn’t Noach slaughter a pig or an elephant to offer to YHVH? Clearly there must be something else to YHVH’s distinction between clean and unclean. There is.
Ray wrote:
> Abraham and his family and their families ate whatever they wanted,
> and they became a mighty nation that still exists today.
We do not know that they “ate whatever they wanted.” Where is this written? Not in scripture.
Noach knew the difference between clean and unclean because it was given him by YHVH and recorded by Mosheh. Would Noach not have communicated this to his children and they to theirs? With no written record until Noach, we can only make assumptions about diet from Adam to Noach, but we should base our assumptions on history and the evidence in the record, not what is missing from it.
In your next paragraphs you provide a very logical argument for the actions and commandments of YHVH - very logical from our point of view. Again, we cannot place words in His mouth or thoughts behind His actions unless it is specifically revealed to us. All else is assumption and opinion and we are in danger of gross error and of adding to or taking away from what is written.
Ray wrote:
> Forward ahead to Leviticus. Wow! There are lots and lots of detailed
> requirements and restrictions about – everything! Whooa. Something
> must have happened because Yahweh was very very angry.
> Hmmm, I see that they just exited 400 years of bondage in hell…
While you present valid reasons and logic in your next two paragraphs, it is not the Word of YHVH. This is all conjecture. Again, we must be careful to not inject our own traditions and doctrine into YHVH’s Word as though it was from Him. The Pharisees were condemned for doing exactly that!
Ray wrote:
> If the book of John can be believed… Yahoshea offered Yahweh’s
> great kingdom with all of the rights of His heirs to Samaritans…
> …I wonder what foods the Samaritans ate?
The reason the Samaritans were so despised by the Yahudim/‘Jews’ had nothing to do with what they ate. It was because they were considered to be half-breeds that thought themselves to be on par with the Yahudim. Sargon brought in immigrants and forced mixing of the population when he conquered Samaria.
Ray, look at this section of YeshiYah/‘Isaiah’ which was written centuries after the exodus from Mitsrayim/‘Egypt’:
Isa 65:3-5 A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.
Why would Yochanan/‘John’ have written this decades after Yahoshea was killed:
Rev 18:2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
If there is no longer any need for a clean/unclean distinction then what difference does it make? Did Shaul/‘Paul’ eat anything he wanted? If he did then he was a liar:
Act 25:7-8 And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
No, he was not a liar. He had never eaten anything unclean. He kept Torah:
Act 21:24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
If we follow Torah and eat a kosher diet we have NOTHING to lose except habits and desires that are rooted in our fleshly pleasures. If we DON’T keep Torah, we may have much to lose. Ultimately it is your decision alone.
~ Moderator
John Medwin
|
Ray, thanks for your controlled response. I know these can be earth shaking doctrines we are talking about and can certainly become emotional. If we can all study the texts and not take these things personal, we can better search for the heart of the Father.
Ray, I have come to see that you held the same beliefs that most of us had at some point. But I now believe your foundation is faulty. Let's look a bit closer:
Also, read Matt 5 where Yeshua says that we are not to think that he came to do away with the Torah. And then "until heaven and earth pass away, not a jot or tittle with pass from the Torah". And if we say that even the least commandment is no longer valid, we'll be least in the kingdom. So if you are committed to Yeshua as your Messiah, then walk as he walked and uphold the Torah. Do you think that he ate pork? And that really is your choice. You can walk as he walked for that reason alone or you can understand why he walked the way he did. The results should be the same. Eat as the master ate. -------Original Message-------
|
John Medwin
|
You sure you want to go there Bro? To say that Scriptures don't really mean what they say but are "metaphors", "parables", and
"poetry" means that none of us are really accountable. After all, you may see a different meaning in the verses than I do. It sounds like an excuse for "to each his own" or "everyone does what is right in their own eyes". So the Scriptures are just some mind stirring writings and really don't reveal the heart of YHWH? |
|
-------Original Message-------
From: Ray
Date: 1/24/2008 5:31:34 PM
To: The Narrow Gate
Subject: [Narrow Gate 1698] Re: The Word - John 1 Hello Moderator,
|
I'm at work and don't have much time but I want to comment on the
verses that you quoted of Isaiah 65. |
|
Isa 65:3-5 "A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my
face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of
brick; Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments,
which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their
vessels; Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am
holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth
all the day."
|
I have stated many times in many threads on this board of the
metaphors and parables I recognize in scripture. Isaiah was a poet and
he wrote very descriptive passages. I 'surface-read' these verses last
night and saw what everyone else saw (I was focused on our subject -
Leviticus 11). Today I read these verses to see what they said and
immediately recognized the metaphors. After studying them for a few
minutes, I saw what he described. This is what the verses of Isaiah
65:3- 5 say to me:
Isa 65:3- 5 A people that continually stand in front of me that make
me angry; that attempt to please me with the wrong things in my places
of learning, and attempt to gain my attention by boasting of their
works placed upon the structures of their own understanding; Which
remain among the dead, and reside in the glory of their own
achievements, which emulate the wrong examples, and have filled their
lives with that which is not of me; Which say to me, "I don't need
you, don't come near to me, for I am better than you." They
continually irritate me.
There's no doubt in my mind that Isaiah directly referenced Leviticus
11 in this passage (and I can understand why he did) but this passage
does not reference physical food. I'll reply more later.
Scripture is so wonderfully descriptive!
Shalom,
Ray |
|
On Jan 23, 9:42 am, NarrowGateGroup <narrowgategr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Greetings once more Ray,
>
> Our forum is open to all who want to learn and to share what YHVH has taught
> them - their knowledge, experience, wisdom and ideas with others. That is
> the purpose of The Narrow Gate.
>
> Consider that if YHVH does NOT require us to eat a "kosher" diet, by doing
> it anyway you have nothing to lose except giving up your desire for pork,
> shrimp, etc. If, on the other hand, He DOES require it, you have MUCH to
> lose by your disobedience.
>
> Ray wrote:
> > You can look down on me for eating the foods that I do or for whatever
> > reasons you want and I will not point at you and say anything about
> > how you worship Yahweh because, Moderator, I can see you across the
> > grain field and I know you hear the same voice as I do. I think we're
> > both focused on the right gate.
>
> "Look down on" you? Why? I'm surrounded with an entire community that thinks
> I'm the nutty one! I'm not saying anything about "how you worship." This is
> not about who is right or who is wrong, it is about finding truth. I
> appreciate your thoughtful response and once again, your heart shows through
> in what you say.
>
> On Jan 22, 3:56 pm, Ray wrote:
>
|
> > . I'll start by briefly offering a discourse on two subjects -
> > 'Tradition', and 'What we physically take in'.
>
> > First - Tradition:
> > . A young girl was watching her mother prepare a roast and she |
|
> > saw her cut off one end before she placed it in a somewhat large
> > cooking pan.
>
> I have used this same story to make a point many times. It is a perfect
> example of what has occurred with so many 'religious' rites, rituals, and
> doctrines. As is said, the blind lead the blind and both fall in the ditch.
> Or the traditions of men (or in the example stated, mother and grandmother)
> are placed above the Commandments of YHVH.
>
> And you correctly stated:
>
|
> > . How often the meanings of traditions or instructions are forgotten or |
|
> > misunderstood and blindly carried forward into our future generations.
>
> This is where we must separate what is man's tradition which we may
> disregard or ignore from what is a guideline or commandment from YHVH that
> is to be our obedient way of life.
>
> You list many substances and practices that are potentially harmful. We all
> should be aware of those substances and practices that may compromise our
> health and our quality of life. I have condensed your list and explanation
> of cause and effect:
>
> Ray wrote:
|
> > Second - What we physically take in: |
|
>
> > I will address below some of what is NOT written into scripture about
> > things we take into our bodies to put the reason of my understanding
> > into perspective.
>
> > I could be wrong with some of this but as far as I know there is
> > nothing written in scripture about working with chemicals or
|
> > radioactive materials. chlorine or fluorine. asbestos. petroleum
> > burning vehicles. |
|
> > Nothing is mentioned about mandatory medical injections (or any
|
> > medicines for that matter). adding chemicals to foods.
> > EMF flux fields. portable RF or radiating energy fields. |
|
>
> Ray, there are THOUSANDS of food substances and additives commonly in use
> today that simply didn't exist or hadn't been discovered when YHVH through
> Mosheh gave us Torah and the dietary laws in Wayyiqra/'Leviticus.' Some of
> these "modern" substances are very beneficial to our lives. Others extract a
> high price for their reported "benefit."
>
> There were also THOUSANDS of actions that were not possible when Torah was
> given such as speeding in an automobile, snow boarding, sky diving or hang
> gliding. All these are potentially deadly activities threatening life and
> limb.
>
> Please examine very closely what you have written in the following several
> paragraphs. I will comment on each statement:
>
> > As Yahweh loves all of his children past, present and future, physical
> > health alone would not have been the intent of His strict eating
> > requirements found in Leviticus 11.
>
> We are on thin ice when we speak of what was YHVH's "intent." We cannot
> interpret YHVH's intent else we presume to speak for Him and put words in
> His mouth that He did NOT say. Neither can we know His thoughts unless they
> are clearly expressed to us through His Word.
>
> You are correct that Wayyiqra/'Leviticus' 11 is not about "health alone." In
> fact, it's not about health at all!
>
|
> Not once does YHVH say that "clean" and "unclean" is about health - EVER! |
|
> This is an assumption made by man, NOT stated by YHVH.
>
> For centuries Christians and others have said that the reason for the
> dietary laws was YHVH's concern for the health of His people. They are
> wrong. This is man's reasoning, NOT YHVH's. We all agree that our health
> should be and is a great concern, and that eating kosher is healthy but it
> is NOT the reason YHVH gives for the clean/unclean distinction of foods.
>
|
> Think about this. how could the most powerful armies in the world of that |
|
> time have possibly survived? The "unhealthy" and swine-consuming armies of
> the Persians, Greeks, Romans and others conquered the entire known world!
>
|
> There must be something more to this. There is. |
> > requirements and restrictions about - everything! Whooa. Something |
|
> > must have happened because Yahweh was very very angry.
|
> > Hmmm, I see that they just exited 400 years of bondage in hell. |
|
>
> While you present valid reasons and logic in your next two paragraphs, it is
> not the Word of YHVH. This is all conjecture. Again, we must be careful to
> not inject our own traditions and doctrine into YHVH's Word as though it was
> from Him. The Pharisees were condemned for doing exactly that!
>
> Ray wrote:
|
> > If the book of John can be believed. Yahoshea offered Yahweh's
> > great kingdom with all of the rights of His heirs to Samaritans.
> > .I wonder what foods the Samaritans ate? |
|
>
> The reason the Samaritans were so despised by the Yahudim/'Jews' had nothing
> to do with what they ate. It was because they were considered to be
> half-breeds that thought themselves to be on par with the Yahudim. Sargon
> brought in immigrants and forced mixing of the population when he conquered
> Samaria.
>
> Ray, look at this section of YeshiYah/'Isaiah' which was written centuries
> after the exodus from Mitsrayim/'Egypt':
>
> Isa 65:3-5 A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that
> sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; Which
> remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's
> flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; Which say, Stand
> by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a
> smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.
>
> Why would Yochanan/'John' have written this decades after Yahoshea was
> killed:
>
> Rev 18:2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the
> great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the
> hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
>
|
> If there is no longer any need ...
>
> read more >>
| ||
|
|
Ray
sorry I offended you by using the word poet.
I wrote:
>"This is what the verses of Isaiah 65:3- 5 say to me:"
have explained in other posts about some of the metaphors I have
recognized. Garden is one of them. That word is what first caught my
attention. I have shared that I have found the words of scripture to
be descriptive. I am truly sorry what someone else has seen in
scripture offends you so much.
I don't know how I could have said what I did any better or less
offensive.
I'm going to sleep.
> more
> > "clean" beasts:
>
> > Gen 8:20 And Noah builded an altar unto the YHVH; and took of every clean
> > beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
>
> > Why are only "clean" beasts offered to YHVH? There was no "Egyptian pagan
> > idol worship" influence in Noach's mind. YHVH was not concerned about His
> > health being affected by these offerings. Why didn't Noach slaughter a pig
> > or an elephant to offer to YHVH? Clearly there must be something else to
> > YHVH's distinction between clean and unclean. There is.
>
> > Ray wrote:
> > > Abraham and his family and their families ate whatever they wanted,
> > > and they
>
>
> read more »
>
> elephant_en.gif
> 44KViewDownload- Hide quoted text -
John Medwin
|
No offense taken, my friend. I am much too hard headed and thick skinned. I just think you are walking on thin ice if you can read a command in clear cut terms - eat this - don't eat this - and "be holy for I am holy" and read anything into it but what it says. I know you were specifically referring to the passage in Isaiah, but the theme in Isaiah is what is already laid in Lev 11. Let's not make this harder than it is. When YHWH says this you can eat and this you can't and you see the same theme running from beginning to end of the book, you can take it to the bank.
I think if humorous that in church we claim to be a nation of priests, yet don't even know the duties of a true priest:
Eze 44:23 ASV And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean. |
Ray
but if he doesn't and reads this, you have replied to it so it's
attached to your reply. He can reply to my email if he wants to.
NarrowGateGroup
Greetings Ray,
What would it cost you to give up bacon? Or shrimp?
Yes, scripture is chock-full of metaphors, parables and poetic pictures of life and spiritual matters. But what is not metaphor, parable, etc is actual, literal, explicit, and painfully straightforward talk, including the commands of YHVH.
Remember that when Yahoshea lived, he was a Hebrew child born to Hebrew parents living in a Hebrew country with ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED YEARS of history following Torah and YHVH’s commandments. If we back up the clock to Noach’s “clean/unclean” distinction, then we have about TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED YEARS of history of separating clean food from unclean non-food.
Can you find one verse where the dietary laws are abolished? Is there one example that believers slaughtered and ate a pig? Yes, there are mistranslated and misinterpreted references to diet in 1 Corinthians 10:25-32, Romans 14 and a couple of others. These are the errors of man, not the Word of YHVH. Even if they were correct as they are (mis-)understood, they could not possibly have been strong enough instruction to change 1,400 years of Torah!
People don’t like change. Depending upon your age, you may remember when our Bureau of Standards attempted to impose the metric system of measurement upon all America. After millions of dollars spent trying to “sell” it to America, it didn’t work. Why? Habits are hard to break Two hundred years of doing things a certain way. And the inch, foot, yard, mile, cup, quart, etc. aren’t even close to being COMMANDMENTS given by YHVH!
The devout, Torah-observant Yahudite/‘Jew’ would have DIED rather than eat swine. Read 2 Maccabees chapter 7:
2 Maccabees 7:1-4 It came to pass also, that seven brethren with their mother were taken, and compelled by the king against the law to taste swine's flesh, and were tormented with scourges and whips. But one of them that spake first said thus, What wouldest thou ask or learn of us? we are ready to die, rather than to transgress the laws of our fathers. Then the king, being in a rage, commanded pans and caldrons to be made hot: Which forthwith being heated, he commanded to cut out the tongue of him that spake first, and to cut off the utmost parts of his body, the rest of his brethren and his mother looking on.
If it was proper to raise swine for food, how could Yahoshea have possibly allowed unclean spirits cast out of the man of the tombs to enter and destroy a herd of 2,000 swine in Mark 5:13? This herd of swine clearly was being raised for food.
Mar 5:13-14 And forthwith Yahoshea gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea. And THEY THAT FED THE SWINE fled, and told it in the city, and in the country. And they went out to see what it was that was done.
This would have meant certain economic devastation for the Gadarenes that raised and depended on this food supply. It could have even led to a localized depression and famine. How could Yahoshea allow this to occur? Where was his concern for the pig farmers? He was not concerned at all because swine are not fit for human consumption.
When YeshiYah spoke of “swine flesh and broth of abominable things” in chapter 65:3-5 this was once again the strongest possible image of something disgusting, detestable and putrid to YHVH. If swine flesh and “abominable things” are now acceptable as food to YHVH’s chosen people, then wouldn’t the other practices that YeshiYah listed in 65:3-5 also now be approved by YHVH?
Please don’t be offended by this example, but in today’s street language YeshiYah might have said that they “eat sh_t and putrid sewage is in their pot” Does that mean that they actually eat sh_t and sewage? Of course not, but it is one of the most graphic images of a repulsive practice that we can muster.
Metaphor or not, all those things listed in YeshiYah 65:3-5 were and still are objectionable to YHVH or they wouldn’t have been mentioned in this passage. Nothing has changed! To Him they are STILL putrid, disgusting – abominable!
We can’t put lipstick on a pig and make it acceptable food and neither can we say that all these references to unclean animals are just “metaphors” and that Yahoshea cleansed all foods so now they’re okay to eat. If this “cleansing” did take place, there is certainly no mention of it. Remember, this “cleansing” would have to completely contradict 1,400 years of ingrained teaching, practice and way of life of the entire Yahudim/‘Jewish’ community.
Come on now Ray, we aren’t trying to pick on you. You have a great heart and one of the most unique points of view I’ve found when it comes to scripture. You are gifted at expressing what you see in scripture and I love that. We are all looking for truth together.
I ask you again, what would it cost you to give up bacon? What could it be costing you in your relationship with YHVH? If you have the even the slightest doubt about unclean foods, why would you continue to eat them?
Obedience is all that He asks of us.
~ Moderator
Ray
(As I reference a recent dialogue with John in this reply, I desire
for John to read it too.)
>Isa 65:3-5 "A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day."
when I described Isaiah, and he cast aside the book of John chapter 1
as being nothing more than a poem. John seems to distain poets for
reasons I do not know. Poetry is nothing more than taking a word or a
phrase and describing it in another, more colorful way. The words of
scripture are poetic. John stands infuriated with me because I
recognize this and I have the audacity to share what I recognize from
John 1 and Isaiah 65:3- 5.
I have stated many times in many threads on this board that scripture
is filled with metaphors. A metaphor is a word with one or more
meanings. I have listed several of the words or phrases I've
recognized as metaphors and I have tried to show everyone how this is
true. By becoming aware of the metaphors and parables described by
Yahshua throughout scripture, starting from within the book of John, I
have learned to recognize the descriptive language written into the
words of scripture. I know now with absolute certainty that scripture
was written this way so that all of Yahweh's children would be able to
understand him no matter what credible translation they read and/or
study from. This includes the NIV and the KJV.
I have been cursed and blessed to be able to read scripture as I do. I
am cursed because I stand alone among Yahweh's children in that I have
begun to see the world for what it is really like. I see the physical
and spiritual relationships described in scripture projected in the
world around me and I'm seeing our world die. I am blessed because I
am beginning to see the light of life radiating from Yahweh's
creations that know Him. I can see the walking lifeless and I can see
the potential in each one of them to become a new creation. That's a
blessing. The curse is that I cannot communicate well and all I can do
is watch for the most part, and this weight feels like it is becoming
more than I can bear. My only solace is that I know Yahshua has placed
this weight on my shoulders to strengthen me.
Against what I feel are Johns wishes I will repost what I deleted
concerning Isaiah 65:3- 5 and explain in more detail why Isaiah's
words say what they do to me. I will list the words Isaiah used from
the translation you used. I am sure I will not be able to fully
express what I'm trying to say but this is all I am able to do.
sacrifice - When a person makes a sacrifice they give up something
they or someone else considers valuable in order to either keep or
gain something of equal or greater value. A person who sacrifices
something of little or no value for any reason will experience little
or no gain. When a person demands a conditional sacrifice be made by
another and the conditions are not met, the sacrifice has a negative
value to the one giving it.
garden - A garden is a place where things are grown and cultivated.
Gardens are places where some people find pleasure, serenity,
happiness and satisfaction. Gardens have been described as
therapeutic. People work through problems in a garden so a garden is a
place of learning. Proper thought and maintenance of a garden will
produce a crop pleasing to others whether visual or otherwise. A
proper thought out and maintained garden produces an abundance of
fruits and vegetables which in turn describes a source of nutritious
foods and proclaims health. A garden could be a metaphor for a library
or a church, or a bible study group. A garden could also be
descriptive of an educational facility. A garden is a place where new
life is cultivated into maturity and is often associated with life and
beauty.
Incense - Incense is a substance burned for its fragrant smell, but
not all incense smells are pleasing to all people. Smoke carrying the
fragrance of incense lifts gently into the air above the burning
substance and permeates the area around it. Incense must be supported
in order for it to burn or it will go out. Too much of some types of
incense are a bad thing as the fragrance could be overwhelming.
Burning incense could be metaphoric for boasting about or describing
personal works for prideful reasons. Just as the fragrance of incense
lingers in the place where it has burned, so the fragrance of the
mental images of the boasting or the testimonies of a persons personal
achievements will linger in the minds of those who have heard or been
affected by them.
altar - An alter is a raised ceremonial religious structure typically
a flat-topped rock or a table of wood or stone where religious
ceremonies are performed. An altar is something that has to be
constructed. Rocks, wood and stone are natural products of the earth
and were created by Yahweh. An altar can be physical or otherwise
depending on how it is constructed. For instance, every altar ever
made was built with someone's work, yet many things that are built
every moment of every day are not physical structures. A relationship
is such an example.
bricks - Bricks are man-made hardened blocks used to support
something. Bricks are formed out of materials chosen by man and
hardened with techniques determined by the understanding of man. I
wrote a post about the tower of Babel and described how the
instructors at a university taught their students how to make bricks
from the knowledge of the instructors and other people before them.
graves - Graves are places where people have died and are buried in
the ground. A grave stores the remains of the dead. A grave describes
death. A place of graves describes a place where many people have been
put after they no longer live. There is no life in a grave. When one
walks among the graves, one walks in the presence of the lifeless, or
the dead. Remaining among the graves describes a person who has come
from a place of the living and has chosen to stay apart from life. A
person who remains among the graves has chosen death over life.
Another way of saying this is that a person who remains among the
graves prefers to live in the past.
lodge - When one lodges one lives or resides in a place.
monument - A monument describes something designed and built as a
lasting public tribute to a person, a group of people, or an event. A
monument may be a physical structure or it may be a spoken or a
written proclamation. The word 'monument' describes many things
however, in essence a monument is a physical (or otherwise) structure
designed with the intent to remind the present of the past, or
possibly, the living of the dead.
eat - To eat is to take in something. Eating consists of chewing,
tasting and swallowing food. If what we chew tastes good, we swallow
it. One can eat both physically and mentally. Children 'eat' (take in)
information from all of their living environment. We 'eat' , we take
in, our environment and learn from it. When we 'eat' information we
consider, and evaluate, and reason, and if it meets our approval, we
accept it. Yahshua said: "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me
will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be
thirsty."; "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son
of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my
flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at
the last day."; and "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains
in me, and I in him."
Broth - Broth is a soup base for other foods that that can be
swallowed (taken in). A broth is a flavored liquid made from meats and
seasonings boiled in water. The meat is removed and the flavor of the
meat remains with the liquid.
"eat swine's flesh and broth of abominable things". This phrase is a
direct reference to the biblical book of Leviticus chapter 11. Yahweh
had to gain control of His people by giving them strict dietary and
living guidelines after being set free from 400 years of Egyptian
captivity. He did this to help His children obey His Law by giving
them both structure and the requirements for a holy life. Leviticus 11
has defined swine for these people to be a detestable food and
Leviticus 11 lists the remainder of detestable or abominable creatures
(swine is included) that the Hebrew people must not eat but not even
touch.
vessel - A vessel is a container that carries something. We are
containers. Jeremiah 2:13 states Yahweh as saying : "My people have
committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water,
and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold
water." A cistern is a container designed to hold water, and Yahweh
describes us as cisterns, which are containers, which are vessels.
When I first read these verses I had images of gravestones and pigs
and someone who was angry and all, but after studying them for a while
I could better understand what Yahweh's Spirit had described through
the writing of Isaiah. Taking into account what I have presented above
I will once again share what Isaiah 65:3- 5 says TO ME. To keep these
verses in perspective I will also include Isaiah 65:1- 2:
Yahweh was speaking to the nation of Israel when he said this through
His Prophet Isaiah:
>I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me; I was found by those who did not seek me. To a nation that did not call on my name, I said, 'Here am I, here am I.' All day long I have held out my hands to an obstinate people, who walk in ways not good, pursuing their own imaginations - A people that continually stand in front of me that make me angry; that attempt to please me with the wrong things in my places of growth and learning, and attempt to gain my attention by boasting of their works placed upon the structures built upon the knowledge of their own understanding; Which choose to live among the works of others, and reside in the glory of their own achievements, which emulate the wrong examples, and have filled their lives with that which is not of me; Which say to me, "I don't need you, don't come near to me, for I am better than you." They continually irritate me.
You asked if I thought if Yahshua ate pork. It isn't written what
Yahshua ate or drank other than he was called "a glutton and a
drunkard" but I think that he did not eat pork because he followed
Jewish customs in order to be able relate to the Jewish people. Now I
ask you, did the Jewish people eat his flesh and drink his blood? He
stated that's what they had to do if they wanted to live and THAT sure
wasn't a Jewish thing to do, was it?
Cornelius was a vessel of Yahweh who was described to Peter as being
respected by all of the Jewish people. Yahweh's angel told Peter to
'Kill and eat' the creatures he saw in his vision. Yahweh took what
was unclean and made it clean through belief in His Son Yahshua and
this included both animals and people. Yahweh did not tell Peter to go
kill and eat the Gentiles. This very record points directly to John's
description of the last supper where Yahshua started to wash Peter's
feet and Peter pulled away. Yahshua's words to Peter were "You do not
realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand." In Acts
10 the understanding of Yahshua's words and example were beginning to
blossom within Peter after this vision and while he didn't understand
it all, he knew what it meant. Yahweh used Cornelius and his family to
communicate his promise of salvation to the Jews to show them that
Yahshua fulfilled the prophesies of His Prophets. Peter brought the
salvation of Yahshua to them and while he was witnessing to them
living water flowed from within them. They became Yahweh's heirs.
Yahshua said in Matthew 5:17- 18
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I
have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the
truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not
the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law
until everything is accomplished."
This is a very true statement!
I have written a post and various replies about 'heaven and earth'. I
recognize that there are three categories of heavens and earths and
these are described throughout scripture. The first two categories are
physical and they end in death. The third category is spiritual and it
continues forever. Each of us constitutes an earth with a heaven
inside of us but until we are born again it is only physical. When we
are 'born again' we become new creations and heirs of Yahweh.
When we are born again we become new creations in Yahweh and His
endless supply of living water flows from within us. Living water can
only flow from the throne of Yahweh and the Lamb, which is in great
city of Yahweh, which is called the new Jerusalem, which shows that "...
everything is accomplished."
Laws are only needed when people do not understand the dangers of
their environment, and laws are made for the protection of everyone.
When we believe in Yahshua and ask him to fill our lives, then we will
emulate him and streams of living water flowing from the throne of
Yahweh and the Lamb will flow from within us. When we believe and
confess in Yahshua we become new creations and Yahweh's heirs, and
everything is accomplished. The reason for the Law is no longer valid
because we are able to begin understanding the dangers of our
environment. The Law turns to instructions and Yahweh's Spirit helps
us understand why the Law was necessary. We all start as infants and,
as we grow in the stature and wisdom of Yahweh, there is no desire or
need for killing or adultery or lust or stealing or seeking false gods
or any of those things described in the Law. As we grow and mature, we
are in a learning mode and not in bondage.
I am sure you will disagree with what I just wrote and say that this
is 'Christian doctrine'. This is what I see in scripture and as I said
in the very beginning of this post, I am alone. I am both blessed and
cursed. What Christian has ever described the things that you have
read from me?
I cannot go back to the ways of death and I cannot live in the past.
While you and some others have given me some very good heath reasons
for avoiding certain physical foods, what I put into my mouth only
sustains my physical body for a short while and then it passes through
my body and exits as undesirable waste. Those kinds of foods will not
make me spiritually strong. The fruits of scripture nourishes my life
and they pass through my body to others in my actions as something
desirable and pleasing to Yahweh. These types of foods not only
strengthen me, they strengthen those around me.
I have tried to share my heart and have tried not to use the words you
find offensive and this hasn't been easy. I have struggled to use only
the names you approve of and this too has been difficult. In a letter
you sent me last year you listed many words used in today's
translations that claim have their roots in pagan gods or rituals.
Mercy is one of those words. I think the early translators chose the
wrong word - they should have used the word 'compassion'.
Scripture is filled with Yahweh's great compassion for us.
The Law was made and the requirements of Leviticus were established
because of pagan origins. The Law and the written requirements of
Leviticus were not necessary during the time of Abraham because the
Law was completely understood.
Yahweh told Peter through his angel "Do not call anything impure that
Yahweh has made clean" through the promise of believing in His Son,
Yahshua.
I don't know how much longer I'll post here but I'm tired. There is so
much more that I haven't found in scripture, and so much that I have
found and haven't shared but as I have stated, I feel I stand alone in
what I've learned, and 'alone' is a very lonely place.
Shalom,
Ray
John Medwin
|
Ray. Shalom. Bro, don't be over sensitive here. I told you before, you did not offend me. Nor was I infuriated with you. Nothing could be further from the truth. I see you in the same place I used to be. There seems to be something in each one of us that resists the idea that God wants his people to live a certain way, including how we eat. (And please don't think that Yeshua died to make pigs clean!)
As to poetry, there is nothing wrong with it. Much of Scripture is poetic. Much is not. Wisdom is knowing the difference. The Messiah was known as speaking in parables - where you had to search for the meaning in the message. This was generally not the style of the prophets.
Irregardless of whether you see poetry or not, all Scripture is given of the Rauch (Holy Spirit). Many use being "led of the Spirit" to justify not keeping the Torah. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the whole reason for the pouring out of the Ruach is to teach us how to keep Torah.
Eze 36:26-27 ASV A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. (27) And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them.So if one's poetry is being used to keep them from walking in the commandments, then it is not of the Rauch.
As to eating kosher, remember, that it's been around since at least Noah's time. Clean and unclean are spoken of in Revelation as well. So its in the beginning and the end. It was not given to a people who were simply coming out of Egypt. It was always God's plan for all his people. Once again, if you don't believe this, then do the medical research and see why these 'foods' are so bad for you. The State of California once considered putting a health warning on their shellfish, since there were so many deaths caused by it, but the lobbyists prevailed.
Now, Ray, I think you are missing some of the Hebrew poetry, a style known as 'remez'. A remez is a style where one uses a key Hebrew word to refer back to other Scriptures. In the NT, the Messiah often used remez to slam the Pharisees. We often miss it because we are not accustomed to it. So for Isaiah to use the word "abomination", the remez takes one back to the verse that defines an abomination, here being Lev 11. When the prophets were rebuking, they were not using flowery or hidden messages, they were being direct and forthright. Their remez was a way to pack more in the punch. In fact, the message of all the prophets was the same, 'you broke Torah, come on back':
2Ki 17:13-15 ASV Yet Jehovah testified unto Israel, and unto Judah, by every prophet, and every seer, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. (14) Notwithstanding, they would not hear, but hardened their neck, like to the neck of their fathers, who believed not in Jehovah their God. (15) And they rejected his statutes, and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified unto them; and they followed vanity, and became vain, and went after the nations that were round about them, concerning whom Jehovah had charged them that they should not do like them.So if you see poetry, fine. As long as you don't miss the message. And in the case given by Isaiah, it was that they were backslidden, even to the point of eating the abominable things. The gardens referred to the groves where they worshipped idols. He continues with the same theme in the next chapter:
Isa 66:16-17 ASV For by fire will Jehovah execute judgment, and by his sword, upon all flesh; and the slain of Jehovah shall be many. (17) They that sanctify themselves and purify themselves to go unto the gardens, behind one in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, they shall come to an end together, saith Jehovah.You can't get much clearer than that. Do you really think that YHWH will execute judgement on one generation for eating swine's flesh and excuse the next generation for doing the same thing? Do you really want to take a chance on being at the end of the wrath of YHWH? Perhaps then, you can understand the heart that the Moderator and I have for you my friend.
Shabbat Shalom
-------Original Message------- |
CHARLES HUFMAN
----- Original Message -----From: John Medwin
NarrowGateGroup
Greetings again Ray,
I see no other path and so I must “speak the truth in love” or not speak at all. I ask you to consider that it is with love and concern for you that I write this reply to your last message. These are truly issues of life and death.
2Timothy 4:1-4 I charge thee therefore before YHVH, and the Master Yahoshea HaMashiach, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Have you turned the Word of YHVH into “fables” with your many metaphors?
No one disputes “that scripture is filled with metaphors.” But these metaphors cannot and do not contradict actual scriptural record. If we see something that isn’t there then we may have gone off the deep end into our own private interpretation, turning the truth into “fables.”
2Kepha/‘Peter’ 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private (one’s own) interpretation.
Although we will not all agree on what scripture says in every instance, it is NOT open for our interpretation!
Ray wrote (emphasis added):
--- “I know now with absolute certainty that scripture was written this way so that all of Yahweh's children would be able to understand him no matter what credible translation they read and/or study from.” ---
And you said (emphasis added):
--- “I have been cursed and blessed to be able to read scripture as I do. I am cursed because I stand alone among Yahweh's children in that I have begun to see the world for what it is really like.” ---
Come back down to earth, Ray. You seem to set yourself apart with a “special understanding” that no one else has. I might agree with you if it weren’t that your “understanding” contradicts YHVH’s Word. We must not consider ourselves higher than we ought.
None of us are above our teacher and our living example.
MattithYah 10:24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
We shall look into at least one example where you have put your thoughts and motives into the actions of our Master. Have you placed yourself above him?
Rom 12:3 For I say, through the favor given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as YHVH hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
1Co 8:2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of YHVH;
You may have great insight but there are hundreds, if not thousands throughout history, and even today, who have “stood alone” in their understanding of scripture. Ellen G. White, Mary Baker Eddy, Herbert W. Armstrong, Victor Paul Wierwille, and Sun Myung Moon just to name a few who had very “special” understandings of scripture. Were they right? Did they have the truth?
But Ray, you are no longer simply seeing metaphors in scripture, you have made the Word of YHVH a story book! If it contradicts what you believe then you say it is a metaphor and you develop your interpretation around what you think YHVH meant. Where the Word does not fit your beliefs you make the literal symbolic, replacing YHVH’s clear Word with your personal opinion.
Your metaphorical explanations, at least concerning “clean/unclean” do not stand up to the acid-test of scriptural verification.
And Ray wrote (emphasis added):
--- “Taking into account what I have presented above I will once again share what Isaiah 65:3- 5 says TO ME.” ---
You are welcome to your opinion of what YeshiYah 65 says to you. Your “private interpretation.” You are also welcome to your opinion of every other verse in scripture. This is why there are over 6,000 denominations all claiming to be ‘Christian’ and all preaching their “truth.”
Although I like your method of writing and I appreciate your ability to vividly express your thoughts, I am not interested in your opinion. I am only interested in the truth. I evaluate and consider what you say to see if it lines up with what YHVH has said! If it does then we have common ground on which to fellowship and learn from each other. If what you say is contrary to what YHVH has clearly said, then I must discard your words as only your opinion.
Your explanation of YeshiYah 65:1-5 is inspiring and uplifting and gives (no pun intended) food for thought but it is not “thus saith YHVH!”
As I said before (emphasis added):
“If we follow Torah and eat a kosher diet we have NOTHING to lose except habits and desires that are rooted in our fleshly pleasures. If we DON'T keep Torah, we may have much to lose. Ultimately it is your decision alone.”
Yahoshea was our example as John Medwin said (emphasis added):
“So if you are committed to Yeshua as your Messiah, then walk as he walked and uphold the Torah. Do you think that he ate pork? And that really is your choice. You can walk as he walked for that reason alone or you can understand why he walked the way he did. The results should be the same. Eat as the master ate.”
If you see YHVH’s commandments as metaphors and not as literal instructions, directives, and commands, then so be it. You must decide for yourself what you will and will not do and what you do and do not believe. Each of us may believe the other is wrong but our opinions and desires do not sway YHVH or change His truth. His truth is not subjective. No matter what we choose to believe, He changes not.
Ray wrote:
--- “You asked if I thought if Yahshua ate pork. It isn't written what Yahshua ate or drank other than he was called "a glutton and a drunkard" ---
And in the same passage Yochanan the Immerser was said to have a devil. Neither charge was true.
Ray wrote (emphasis added):
--- “but I THINK that he did not eat pork BECAUSE he followed Jewish customs in order to be able to relate to the Jewish people.” ---
This is your “private interpretation.” Think what you want but you are saying the only reason he didn’t chow down on BBQ ribs and bacon cheeseburgers is because he wanted to make points with the ‘Jews.’ Really? And how did that work out for him? Did that make them like him?
Can you give one example where he held his tongue or compromised his actions simply to make “friends”? No, quite the opposite, they KILLED him because he went against their traditions and customs! With “friends” like that, who needs enemies?
Ray, no matter what gift or insight you may have, on this issue you are wrong. Yahoshea did NOT follow customs of the Yahudim “in order to be able to relate to them.” If he had, then he would not have been at odds with the established religious power structure and they would not have killed him.
You have projected YOUR thoughts and YOUR motivation to Yahoshea’s actions. No matter how great your insight, this is only your opinion. You cannot presume to know his thoughts or motivation unless it is clearly stated. We must read scripture to receive understanding, not read OUR understanding INTO scripture.
I respect your opinion and love your ability to communicate and admire your point of view but if what you say is contrary to what is very plainly written then it is of no value. There are many great writers that inspire and sway the hearts of huge numbers of people. Khalil Gibran, Dr. Phil, and Oprah are very inspiring and have influence over millions but it doesn’t make what they say the TRUTH.
Again, truth is not subjective. It does not change based upon what we “think.” Truth is what YHVH through scripture tells us. If YHVH does not tell us, then we simply do not know. All else is speculation, assumption and opinion, not the Word of YHVH. If we believe YHVH has revealed more truth to us, this revelation CANNOT contradict or alter the meaning of what is already written.
Yahoshea did not compromise in order “to relate to” or to please anyone. He ONLY did the will of his Father:
Yochanan 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
And he always did what pleased YHVH:
Yochanan 8:28, 29 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.
Ray wrote:
--- “Now I ask you, did the Jewish people eat his flesh and drink his blood? He stated that's what they had to do if they wanted to live and THAT sure wasn't a Jewish thing to do, was it?” ---
Of course they didn’t actually do these things anymore than the scribes and Pharisees were actually snakes or a “generation of vipers” (Mat 3:7; 12:34; 23:33; Luke 3:7) or whitewashed tombs (Mat 23:27)!
Ray wrote:
--- “Yahweh took what was unclean and made it clean through belief in His Son Yahshua and this included both animals and people.” ---
Really? When did the unclean “animals” obtain this belief in Yahoshea that cleansed them? When was the word of truth preached to and understood by a pig or a lobster? Seems like Yahoshea said something about “casting pearls before swine” didn’t he? Was that literal or metaphorical?
Your logic is flawed and I reject it completely. Lay the “metaphorical” thinking aside and just read what is clearly written. Cornelius and his household were human beings and were made clean by their belief. You cannot transfer that “cleansing” to every dog, horse, raccoon, possum or cockroach on his property. Do you see that this is what you are attempting to do?
Speaking again of the “kill and eat” vision in Acts 10 - Ray wrote:
--- “This very record points directly to John's description of the last supper where Yahshua started to wash Peter's feet and Peter pulled away. Yahshua's words to Peter were "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand." ---
No, Acts 10 has nothing to do with the last supper and you couldn’t be more off-base. Why not let Yahoshea explain the reason and purpose of the foot-washing? Would you agree that his explanation might be more accurate than yours?
Let’s listen in while he tells what this was all about:
Yochanan 13:12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
No, we don’t know. Please explain:
Yochanan 13:13-16 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
Look at this any way you like, but there is no way you can inject unclean animals or unclean Gentiles into Yahoshea’s explanation of his foot-washing actions. This was ALL about service and he clearly explains it as EXACTLY that! Washing of the Talmudim’s (disciples’) feet had absolutely nothing to do with unclean animals or the house of Cornelius.
What was on the menu of the last supper? What was the entrée? What animal was slaughtered and prepared for dinner by the thousands all across the land the very next day in preparation for Pesach (Passover)?
Yahoshea was the LAMB of YHVH, not the “piglet!”
Continuing, Ray wrote:
--- “In Acts 10 the understanding of Yahshua's words and example were beginning to blossom within Peter after this vision and while he didn't understand it all, he knew what it meant.” ---
What “understanding” and what words of Yahoshea were “beginning to blossom within Peter”? Let’s not speculate or presume. Why not let Kepha/‘Peter’ explain it in his own words?
Let’s listen in as he does exactly that:
Act 11:16-17 Then remembered I the word of the Master, how that he said, Yochanan indeed immersed with water; but ye shall be immersed in the Set-apart Spirit. Forasmuch then as YHVH gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Master Yahoshea HaMashiach; what was I, that I could withstand YHVH?
Not one word about the unclean animals being made clean, only about YHVH giving these Gentiles “the like gift” of the Set-apart Spirit. The elders of the assembly in Yerushalayim/‘Jerusalem’ who were upset with Kepha were silenced by his explanation:
Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified YHVH, saying, Then hath YHVH also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
They were upset at first but they knew what he spoke was profound truth. Ray, you have been and probably will be upset with me. I pray that it will pass and you will see through any hurt, anguish or anger to the profound truth that I have presented. Yes, this is the truth as I see it, what it means to me. However, I have not read anything into what is written. I have not changed one word. All I have presented is the Word as YHVH has given it to all of us. Now it is up to us – to YOU - to believe it.
Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Now, let’s continue on the narrow path that leads to the narrow gate that leads to everlasting life.
~ Moderator
-----Original Message-----
From: TheNar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:TheNar...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Ray
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:46 AM
To: The Narrow Gate
Subject: [Narrow Gate 1704] Re: The Word - John 1
Hello Moderator,
(As I reference a recent dialogue with John in this reply, I desire
CHARLES HUFMAN
----- Original Message -----From: Fancier Quinn